Re: [PATCH v4 0/6] Cleanups for the nomodeset kernel command line parameter logic

[Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>]

On Fri, 12 Nov 2021, Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Nov 2021 11:09:13 +0100
> Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>> 
>> Am 12.11.21 um 10:39 schrieb Javier Martinez Canillas:
>> > Hello Pekka,
>> > 
>> > On 11/12/21 09:56, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
>> > 
>> > [snip]
>> >   
>> >>
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> these ideas make sense to me, so FWIW,
>> >>
>> >> Acked-by: Pekka Paalanen <pekka.paalanen@collabora.com>
>> >>  
>> > 
>> > Thanks.
>> >   
>> >> There is one nitpick I'd like to ask about:
>> >>
>> >> +bool drm_get_modeset(void)
>> >> +{
>> >> +     return !drm_nomodeset;
>> >> +}
>> >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(drm_get_modeset);
>> >>
>> >> Doesn't "get" have a special meaning in the kernel land, like "take a
>> >> strong reference on an object and return it"?  
>> > 
>> > That's a very good point.
>> >   
>> >> As this is just returning bool without changing anything, the usual
>> >> word to use is "is". Since this function is also used at most once per
>> >> driver, which is rarely, it could have a long and descriptive name.
>> >>
>> >> For example:
>> >>
>> >> bool drm_is_modeset_driver_allowed(void);  
>> 
>> I'd nominate
>> 
>>    bool drm_native_drivers_enabled()
>> 
>> This is what HW-specific drivers want to query in their init/probing 
>> code. The actual semantics of this decision is hidden from the driver. 
>> It's also easier to read than the other name IMHO
>
> Ok, but what is a "native driver"? Or a "non-native driver"?
> Is that established kernel terminology?

FWIW, it doesn't mean anything to me.

drm_modeset_enabled()?

*sigh* I worked so hard not to participate in this bikeshed. ;)


BR,
Jani.


>
> I'd think a non-native driver is something that e.g. ndiswrapper is
> loading. Is simpledrm like ndiswrapper in a sense? IIRC, simpledrm is
> the driver that would not consult this function, right?
>
>
> Thanks,
> pq
>
>> 
>> Best regards
>> Thomas
>> 
>> >>  
>> > 
>> > Yeah, naming is hard. Jani also mentioned that he didn't like this
>> > function name, so I don't mind to re-spin the series only for that.
>> >   
>> >> - "drm" is the namespace
>> >> - "is" implies it is a read-only boolean inspection
>> >> - "modeset" is the feature being checked
>> >> - "driver" implies it is supposed gate driver loading or
>> >>    initialization, rather than modesets after drivers have loaded
>> >> - "allowed" says it is asking about general policy rather than what a
>> >>    driver does
>> >>  
>> > 
>> > I believe that name is more verbose than needed. But don't have a
>> > strong opinion and could use it if others agree.
>> >   
>> >> Just a bikeshed, I'll leave it to actual kernel devs to say if this
>> >> would be more appropriate or worth it.
>> >>  
>> > 
>> > I think is worth it and better to do it now before the patches land, but
>> > we could wait for others to chime in.
>> > 
>> > Best regards,
>> > --
>> > Javier Martinez Canillas
>> > Linux Engineering
>> > Red Hat
>> >   
>> 
>

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center