lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Oct]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH drm-misc-next v7 4/7] drm/gpuvm: add an abstraction for a VM / BO combination
From
On 10/31/23 17:50, Thomas Hellström wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-10-31 at 17:30 +0100, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
>> On 10/31/23 12:45, Jani Nikula wrote:
>>> On Tue, 31 Oct 2023, Thomas Hellström
>>> <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 2023-10-23 at 22:16 +0200, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
>>>>> + * Returns: a pointer to the &drm_gpuvm_bo on success, NULL on
>>>>
>>>> Still needs s/Returns:/Return:/g
>>>
>>> FWIW, both work to accommodate the variance across the kernel,
>>> although
>>> I think only the latter is documented and recommended. It's also
>>> the
>>> most popular:
>>>
>>>    10577 Return
>>>     3596 Returns
>>
>> I'd like to keep "Returns", since that's what GPUVM uses already
>> everywhere else.
>
> Ok. It looks like the Returns: are converted to Return in the rendered
> output so I guess that's why it's the form that is documented.
>
> I pointed this out since in the last review you replied you were going
> to change it, and also when the code starts seeing updates from other,
> it might become inconsistent if those patches follow the documented
> way.

Sorry for that. I think I wrote this answer when I was at XDC and hence was
a little bit distracted.

>
> But I'm OK either way.

Ok, then let's just keep it as it is.

>
> /Thomas
>
>
>>
>>>     1104 RETURN
>>>      568 return
>>>      367 returns
>>>      352 RETURNS
>>>        1 RETURNs
>>>
>>> BR,
>>> Jani.
>>>
>>>
>>
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-10-31 18:44    [W:0.440 / U:0.108 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site