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

Christian König
2022-04-21T08:34:43Z

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.

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