Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] dma-buf: Document revoke semantics

[Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>]

On Sun, Jan 18, 2026 at 11:32:20PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> On 1/18/26 11:25 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 18, 2026 at 01:40:11PM -0800, John Hubbard wrote:
> > > On 1/18/26 4:08 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>
> > > ...
> > > > +/**
> > > > + * dma_buf_attachment_is_revoke - check if a DMA-buf importer implements
> > > > + * revoke semantics.
> > > > + * @attach: the DMA-buf attachment to check
> > > > + *
> > > > + * Returns true if DMA-buf importer honors revoke semantics, which is
> > > > + * negotiated with the exporter, by making sure that importer implements
> > > > + * .invalidate_mappings() callback and calls to dma_buf_pin() after
> > > > + * DMA-buf attach.
> > > > + */
> > > > +static inline bool
> > > > +dma_buf_attachment_is_revoke(struct dma_buf_attachment *attach)
> > > 
> > > Maybe a slight rename, to dma_buf_attachment_is_revocable()?
> > 
> > I can do that. The issue is that even "dma_buf_attachment_is_revoke"
> > is already too long. :)
> > 
> 
> If you're really pressed for space for some reason,

Mainly aesthetics.

> maybe dma_buf_attach_revocable() ?
> 
> Just trying to hang on to the "revocable" part of the name, as
> I think it's an improvement.

Sure

> 
> thanks,
> -- 
> John Hubbard
> 
>