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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).