Re: [PATCH 0/7] media: intel/ipu6: continue on ipu7 code sharing preparation

[Stanislaw Gruszka <stanislaw.gruszka@linux.intel.com>]

On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 03:34:22PM +0000, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> Hi Stanislaw,
> 
> On Mon, Apr 07, 2025 at 03:40:30PM +0200, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
> > Move and rename more structures to isys.h. Add accessors to make 
> > further transformation easier.
> > 
> > This is on top of:
> > https://git.linuxtv.org/sailus/media_tree.git/log/?h=devel
> > plus:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-media/20250317073856.162147-1-stanislaw.gruszka@linux.intel.com/
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-media/20250401090953.473339-1-stanislaw.gruszka@linux.intel.com/
> > 
> > Stanislaw Gruszka (7):
> >   media: intel/ipu6: Use isd name in isys.h
> >   media: intel/ipu6: Remove line_align
> >   media: intel/ipu6: Move common structures definitions to isys.h
> >   media: intel/ipu6: Rename common structures
> >   media: intel/ipu6: Remove deprecated lock comment
> >   media: intel/ipu6: Introduce isys and dev accessors macros
> >   media: intel/ipu6: Start using accessors to get dev pointer
> 
> My main comment to the set is naming. Can we do so that we keep the current
> scheme (ipu or ipu-isys prefix, with or without IPU generation number) and
> then reconsider this question when the result (hopefully including IPU 7
> ISYS support) is in upstream?

Ok, I'll use ipu_isys_ prefix for functions, structures and some macros.
However for some macros I think it would make sense to skip ipu prefix to
make the names shorter.

Regards
Stanislaw

> The rest seems entirely reasonable to me -- but see my other comments, too.
> 
> -- 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Sakari Ailus