All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
To: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/uncore: rename i915_reg_read_ioctl intel_uncore_reg_read_ioctl
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2022 11:20:55 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bee03d1e-06dd-6243-e711-ab8d7c7081bb@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <875yqytqv4.fsf@intel.com>


On 05/01/2022 10:32, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Jan 2022, Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>> On 05/01/2022 10:05, Jani Nikula wrote:
>>> Follow the usual naming convention.
>>
>> But intel_uncore_ prefix usually means functions takes intel_uncore as
>> the first argument.
>>
>> Maybe solution here is that i915_reg_read_ioctl does not belong in
>> intel_uncore.c, it being the UAPI layer thing? I guess arguments could
>> be made for either way.
> 
> My position is that the function and file prefixes go hand in
> hand. You'll always know where to place a function, and you'll always
> know where the function is to be found.
> 
> If you can *also* make the context argument follow the pattern, it's
> obviously better, and indicates the division to files is working out
> nicely. However, in a lot of cases you'll need to pass struct
> drm_i915_private or similar as the first parameter to e.g. init
> functions. It can't be the rigid rule.
> 
> I'm fine with moving the entire function somewhere else, as long as the
> declaration is not in i915_drv.h. There's no longer a i915_drv.c, and
> i915_drv.h should not have function declarations at all.

Yes I agree it cannot be a rigid rule. I just that it feels 
intel_uncore.[hc] is too low level to me to hold an ioctl 
implementation, and header actually feels wrong to have the declaration. 
Not least it is about _one_ of the uncores, while the ioctl is not 
operating on that level, albeit undefined at the moment how exactly it 
would work for multi-tile.

Would it be too early, or unwarranted at this point, to maybe consider 
adding i915_ioctls.[hc]?

I like the i915_ prefix of ioctls for consistency.. i915_getparam_ioctl, 
i915_query_ioctl, i915_perf_..., i915_gem_....

Regards,

Tvrtko

> 
> BR,
> Jani.
> 
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Tvrtko
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c  | 2 +-
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 4 ++--
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.h | 4 ++--
>>>    3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c
>>> index 95174938b160..f9a494e159dc 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_driver.c
>>> @@ -1805,7 +1805,7 @@ static const struct drm_ioctl_desc i915_ioctls[] = {
>>>    	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(I915_GEM_WAIT, i915_gem_wait_ioctl, DRM_RENDER_ALLOW),
>>>    	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(I915_GEM_CONTEXT_CREATE_EXT, i915_gem_context_create_ioctl, DRM_RENDER_ALLOW),
>>>    	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(I915_GEM_CONTEXT_DESTROY, i915_gem_context_destroy_ioctl, DRM_RENDER_ALLOW),
>>> -	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(I915_REG_READ, i915_reg_read_ioctl, DRM_RENDER_ALLOW),
>>> +	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(I915_REG_READ, intel_uncore_reg_read_ioctl, DRM_RENDER_ALLOW),
>>>    	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(I915_GET_RESET_STATS, i915_gem_context_reset_stats_ioctl, DRM_RENDER_ALLOW),
>>>    	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(I915_GEM_USERPTR, i915_gem_userptr_ioctl, DRM_RENDER_ALLOW),
>>>    	DRM_IOCTL_DEF_DRV(I915_GEM_CONTEXT_GETPARAM, i915_gem_context_getparam_ioctl, DRM_RENDER_ALLOW),
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
>>> index fc25ebf1a593..33f95bb2d3d5 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c
>>> @@ -2269,8 +2269,8 @@ static const struct reg_whitelist {
>>>    	.size = 8
>>>    } };
>>>    
>>> -int i915_reg_read_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
>>> -			void *data, struct drm_file *file)
>>> +int intel_uncore_reg_read_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
>>> +				void *data, struct drm_file *file)
>>>    {
>>>    	struct drm_i915_private *i915 = to_i915(dev);
>>>    	struct intel_uncore *uncore = &i915->uncore;
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.h
>>> index 3a87bbd906f8..697ac4586159 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.h
>>> @@ -457,7 +457,7 @@ static inline int intel_uncore_write_and_verify(struct intel_uncore *uncore,
>>>    #define raw_reg_write(base, reg, value) \
>>>    	writel(value, base + i915_mmio_reg_offset(reg))
>>>    
>>> -int i915_reg_read_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>>> -			struct drm_file *file);
>>> +int intel_uncore_reg_read_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>>> +				struct drm_file *file);
>>>    
>>>    #endif /* !__INTEL_UNCORE_H__ */
>>>
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2022-01-05 11:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-01-05 10:05 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: move i915_reg_read_ioctl declaration to intel_uncore.h Jani Nikula
2022-01-05 10:05 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915/uncore: rename i915_reg_read_ioctl intel_uncore_reg_read_ioctl Jani Nikula
2022-01-05 10:11   ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-01-05 10:32     ` Jani Nikula
2022-01-05 11:20       ` Tvrtko Ursulin [this message]
2022-01-05 13:18         ` Jani Nikula
2022-01-05 14:33           ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-01-19 11:12             ` Jani Nikula
2022-01-20 10:36               ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-01-05 10:26 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: warning for series starting with [1/2] drm/i915: move i915_reg_read_ioctl declaration to intel_uncore.h Patchwork
2022-01-05 10:55 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2022-01-05 12:13 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork

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=bee03d1e-06dd-6243-e711-ab8d7c7081bb@linux.intel.com \
    --to=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=jani.nikula@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.