On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 12:15 PM Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Christian,
>
> would you review the whole patch set? Daniel mentioned that he'd prefer
> to leave the review to memory-mgmt developers.
I think Noralf Tronnes or Gerd Hoffmann would also make good reviewers
for this, fairly close to what they've been working on in the past.
-Daniel
>
> Best regards
> Thomas
>
> Am 30.04.19 um 11:35 schrieb Koenig, Christian:
> > Am 30.04.19 um 11:23 schrieb Sam Ravnborg:
> >> [CAUTION: External Email]
> >>
> >> Hi Thomas.
> >>
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> +/**
> >>>>> + * Returns the container of type &struct drm_gem_vram_object
> >>>>> + * for field bo.
> >>>>> + * @bo: the VRAM buffer object
> >>>>> + * Returns: The containing GEM VRAM object
> >>>>> + */
> >>>>> +static inline struct drm_gem_vram_object* drm_gem_vram_of_bo(
> >>>>> + struct ttm_buffer_object *bo)
> >>>>> +{
> >>>>> + return container_of(bo, struct drm_gem_vram_object, bo);
> >>>>> +}
> >>>> Indent funny. USe same indent as used in other parts of file for
> >>>> function arguments.
> >>> If I put the argument next to the function's name, it will exceed the
> >>> 80-character limit. From the coding-style document, I could not see what
> >>> to do in this case. One solution would move the return type to a
> >>> separate line before the function name. I've not seen that anywhere in
> >>> the source code, so moving the argument onto a separate line and
> >>> indenting by one tab appears to be the next best solution. Please let me
> >>> know if there's if there's a preferred style for cases like this one.
> >> Readability has IMO higher priority than some limit of 80 chars.
> >> And it hurts readability (at least my OCD) when style changes
> >> as you do with indent here. So my personal preference is to fix
> >> indent and accect longer lines.
> >
> > In this case the an often used convention (which is also kind of
> > readable) is to add a newline after the return values, but before the
> > function name. E.g. something like this:
> >
> > static inline struct drm_gem_vram_object*
> > drm_gem_vram_of_bo(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo)
> >
> > Regards,
> > Christian.
> >
> >>
> >> But you ask for a preferred style - which I do not think we have in this
> >> case. So it boils down to what you prefer.
> >>
> >> Enough bikeshedding, thanks for the quick response.
> >>
> >> Sam
> >
>
> --
> Thomas Zimmermann
> Graphics Driver Developer
> SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstrasse 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany
> GF: Felix Imendörffer, Mary Higgins, Sri Rasiah
> HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
>
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
