[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <149184db-8003-d1d4-4ae0-1401ff1b3359@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2023 10:54:16 +0200
From: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...hat.com>
To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
Cc: matthew.brost@...el.com, thomas.hellstrom@...ux.intel.com,
sarah.walker@...tec.com, nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
donald.robson@...tec.com, christian.koenig@....com,
faith.ekstrand@...labora.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH drm-misc-next v2 2/7] drm/gpuvm: rename struct
drm_gpuva_manager to struct drm_gpuvm
On 9/7/23 09:56, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2023 23:47:10 +0200
> Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>> Rename struct drm_gpuva_manager to struct drm_gpuvm including
>> corresponding functions. This way the GPUVA manager's structures align
>> very well with the documentation of VM_BIND [1] and VM_BIND locking [2].
>>
>> It also provides a better foundation for the naming of data structures
>> and functions introduced for implementing a common dma-resv per GPU-VM
>> including tracking of external and evicted objects in subsequent
>> patches.
>
> I'm fine with this rename, but I feel like some bits are missing in
> this patch. I see a few functions taking a drm_gpuvm object and still
> being prefixed with drm_gpuva_ (I'm not talking about functions that
> only manipulate a drm_gpuva object, but those updating the the VM state,
> like the sm_map/unmap helpers), and I think it'd be preferable to
> rename the source files and the Kconfig option too.
>
I was a bit hesitant to also rename the source files in the first place,
but I think that makes sense.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists