On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 10:52:57AM -0700, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 08, 2021 at 05:49:40PM -0700, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> > We shouldn't be using debugfs_ namespace for this functionality. Rename
> > debugfs_gt_pm.[ch] to intel_gt_pm_debugfs.[ch] and then make
> > functions, defines and structs follow suit.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Makefile | 2 +-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/debugfs_gt_pm.h | 14 --------------
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_debugfs.c | 4 ++--
> > .../gt/{debugfs_gt_pm.c => intel_gt_pm_debugfs.c} | 4 ++--
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_pm_debugfs.h | 14 ++++++++++++++
> > 5 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> > delete mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/debugfs_gt_pm.h
> > rename drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/{debugfs_gt_pm.c => intel_gt_pm_debugfs.c} (99%)
> > create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_pm_debugfs.h
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Makefile b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Makefile
> > index 232c9673a2e5..dd656f2d7721 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Makefile
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Makefile
> > @@ -79,7 +79,6 @@ i915-$(CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS) += i915_pmu.o
> >
> > # "Graphics Technology" (aka we talk to the gpu)
> > gt-y += \
> > - gt/debugfs_gt_pm.o \
> > gt/gen2_engine_cs.o \
> > gt/gen6_engine_cs.o \
> > gt/gen6_ppgtt.o \
> > @@ -103,6 +102,7 @@ gt-y += \
> > gt/intel_gt_engines_debugfs.o \
> > gt/intel_gt_irq.o \
> > gt/intel_gt_pm.o \
> > + gt/intel_gt_pm_debugfs.o \
> > gt/intel_gt_pm_irq.o \
> > gt/intel_gt_requests.o \
> > gt/intel_gtt.o \
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/debugfs_gt_pm.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/debugfs_gt_pm.h
> > deleted file mode 100644
> > index 4cf5f5c9da7d..000000000000
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/debugfs_gt_pm.h
> > +++ /dev/null
> > @@ -1,14 +0,0 @@
> > -/* SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT */
> > -/*
> > - * Copyright © 2019 Intel Corporation
> > - */
> > -
> > -#ifndef DEBUGFS_GT_PM_H
> > -#define DEBUGFS_GT_PM_H
> > -
> > -struct intel_gt;
> > -struct dentry;
> > -
> > -void debugfs_gt_pm_register(struct intel_gt *gt, struct dentry *root);
> > -
> > -#endif /* DEBUGFS_GT_PM_H */
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_debugfs.c
> > index e5d173c235a3..4096ee893b69 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_debugfs.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_debugfs.c
> > @@ -5,10 +5,10 @@
> >
> > #include <linux/debugfs.h>
> >
> > -#include "debugfs_gt_pm.h"
> > #include "i915_drv.h"
> > #include "intel_gt_debugfs.h"
> > #include "intel_gt_engines_debugfs.h"
> > +#include "intel_gt_pm_debugfs.h"
> > #include "intel_sseu_debugfs.h"
> > #include "uc/intel_uc_debugfs.h"
> >
> > @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ void intel_gt_register_debugfs(struct intel_gt *gt)
> > return;
> >
> > intel_gt_engines_register_debugfs(gt, root);
> > - debugfs_gt_pm_register(gt, root);
> > + intel_gt_pm_register_debugfs(gt, root);
>
> This is one case I usually don't know what convention to follow since it
> changes in different places.
>
> I did it like xxxx_register_debugfs because of calls like
> intel_gt_init_scratch(), xxx_init_hw, etc. However here I see that just
> below we have intel_sseu_debugfs_register(), so maybe I should consider
> debugfs as part of the namespace?
I like *_debugfs_register slightly better than *_register_debugfs
because to me we're not registering debugfs itself, we're performing
debugfs' register operation on some files. But I don't really have a
strong feeling either way. Whichever way you decide,
Reviewed-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@xxxxxxxxx>
for the series.
Matt
>
> Lucas De Marchi
--
Matt Roper
Graphics Software Engineer
VTT-OSGC Platform Enablement
Intel Corporation
(916) 356-2795
