From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
To: Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@intel.com>,
Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/guc: Unify parameters of public CT functions
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 13:23:38 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87po3pes0l.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9b2d3ea3-7712-8c8e-455b-235e3531d5f9@intel.com>
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018, Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@intel.com> wrote:
> On 3/20/2018 6:30 PM, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
>> On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 08:24:14 +0100, Sagar Arun Kamble
>> <sagar.a.kamble@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/19/2018 8:58 PM, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
>>>> There is no need to mix parameter types in public CT functions
>>>> as we can always accept intel_guc_ct.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>
>>>> Cc: Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@intel.com>
>>>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> <snip>
>>>> /**
>>>> - * Enable buffer based command transport
>>>> + * intel_guc_ct_enable - Enable buffer based command transport.
>>>> + * @ct: pointer to CT struct
>>>> + *
>>>> * Shall only be called for platforms with HAS_GUC_CT.
>>>> - * @guc: the guc
>>>> - * return: 0 on success
>>>> - * non-zero on failure
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Returns:
>>>> + * 0 on success, a negative errno code on failure.
>>> Should be
>>> * Return: 0 on sucess ...
>>
>> hmm, I'm not so sure:
>>
>> $ grep -r "\* Return: .*" drivers/gpu/drm/* | wc -l
>> 153
>>
>> $ grep -r "\* Returns:$" drivers/gpu/drm/* | wc -l
>> 344
>>
> Hi Michal,
>
> kernel-doc rules recommend "Return:".
Correct. For legacy reasons, a bunch of variants are recognized and
canonicalized to "Return" in the output. I also recommend documenting
the return values immediately following "Return: ", without \n, similar
to the parameter documentation.
BR,
Jani.
>
> Thanks,
> Sagar
>>>> */
>>>> -int intel_guc_enable_ct(struct intel_guc *guc)
>>>> +int intel_guc_ct_enable(struct intel_guc_ct *ct)
>>>> {
>>>> + struct intel_guc *guc = ct_to_guc(ct);
>>>> struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = guc_to_i915(guc);
>>> change to *i915 as part of this patch itself? :) similar for disable.
>>
>> sure
>>
>>> Otherwise LGTM
>>> Reviewed-by: Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@intel.com>
>>
>> thanks
>> /m
>>
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-27 10:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-19 15:28 [PATCH] drm/i915/guc: Unify parameters of public CT functions Michal Wajdeczko
2018-03-19 17:06 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for " Patchwork
2018-03-20 7:24 ` [PATCH] " Sagar Arun Kamble
2018-03-20 13:00 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2018-03-20 15:08 ` Sagar Arun Kamble
2018-03-27 10:23 ` Jani Nikula [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87po3pes0l.fsf@intel.com \
--to=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=michal.wajdeczko@intel.com \
--cc=sagar.a.kamble@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.