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

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <476cdf4b-7b65-c056-abf0-110f442e1cc1@amd.com>
Date:   Thu, 21 Apr 2022 11:23:20 +0200
From:   Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>
To:     Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
        Cai Huoqing <cai.huoqing@...ux.dev>
Cc:     Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
        Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/nvdla: Add driver support for NVDLA

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
>>
>