Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/nvdla: Add driver support for NVDLA

Christian König
2022-04-21T09:23:38Z

Am 21.04.22 um 11:13 schrieb Thomas Zimmermann:
> Hi
>
> Am 21.04.22 um 10:34 schrieb Christian König:
>> Am 21.04.22 um 10:30 schrieb Thomas Zimmermann:
>>> (Resending, as some MLs didn't like the size of the origninal mail.)
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> thanks for your submission. Some general comments:
>>>
>>>   * some functions are prefixed with dla_, others use nvdla_. It
>>> seems arbitrary to me. Please use nvdla_ consistently throughout the
>>> source code.
>>>
>>>   * For reporting errors, please use drm_err(), drm_warn(), etc. I
>>> suggest to rearrange the error messages to not be located in the
>>> innermost functions.
>>
>> If you plan to have multiple instances of the driver loaded at the
>> same time, using drm_dev_err(), drm_dev_warn() etc.. would be even
>> better.
>
> I thought that these functions exist, but looking for them now I
> cannot find them. The macros DRM_DEV_ERR(), etc are deprecated.

That's what I meant with the comment below.

I wasn't 100%, but dev_err() etc.. seems to now be the preferred form
since that allows filtering for log messages of a certain device.

Regards,
Christian.

>
>>
>> BTW: I'm still absolutely not keen to enforcing drm_* log functions.
>> So if you prefer to stick with pr_err() and dev_err() we could
>> discuss that once more.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Christian.
>>
>>>
>>>   * Could you please split this patch into smaller pieces? It
>>> currently hits size limits of some mailing lists. Maybe add the
>>> register constants separately.
>>>
>>> Please find more review comments below. It's not a full review, but
>>> at least something to start with.
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Thomas
>>
>