Re: [PATCH] drm/xe: Rename xe_vm_fault to drm_xe_vm_fault

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] Renaming the exported UAPI structure `xe_vm_fault` breaks userspace source compatibility.
--

commit 718d9f0d7813c0d7b1b78dab4ab5c1afd1f3f75a
Author: Jonathan Cavitt <jonathan.cavitt@intel.com>

drm/xe: Rename xe_vm_fault to drm_xe_vm_fault

This commit renames xe_vm_fault to drm_xe_vm_fault to better align with
uAPI struct naming conventions.

[ ... ]

> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/xe_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/xe_drm.h
> index 8c852abcacf0d..89c0dbe227dd7 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/drm/xe_drm.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/xe_drm.h
> @@ -1271,8 +1271,8 @@ struct drm_xe_vm_bind {
>  	__u64 reserved[2];
>  };
>  
> -/** struct xe_vm_fault - Describes faults for %DRM_XE_VM_GET_PROPERTY_FAULTS */
> -struct xe_vm_fault {
> +/** struct drm_xe_vm_fault - Describes faults for %DRM_XE_VM_GET_PROPERTY_FAULTS */
> +struct drm_xe_vm_fault {

[Severity: High]
Does renaming this exported UAPI structure break userspace source
compatibility? 

Userspace applications that rely on struct xe_vm_fault will fail to compile
when updating their kernel headers and attempting to use the old struct
xe_vm_fault name.

Should a backward-compatible alias be provided for the old name?

>  	/** @address: Canonical address of the fault */
>  	__u64 address;
>  	/** @address_precision: Precision of faulted address */

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260903231632.399765-1-jonathan.cavitt@intel.com?part=1