Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@xxxxxxx> writes: > Hi > > Am 14.09.23 um 21:51 schrieb Javier Martinez Canillas: >> The driver uses a naming convention where functions for struct drm_*_funcs >> callbacks are named ssd130x_$object_$operation, while the callbacks for >> struct drm_*_helper_funcs are named ssd130x_$object_helper_$operation. >> >> The idea is that this helper_ prefix in the function names denote that are >> for struct drm_*_helper_funcs callbacks. This convention was copied from >> other drivers, when ssd130x was written but Maxime pointed out that is the >> exception rather than the norm. > > I guess you found this in my code. I want to point out that I use the > _helper infix to signal that these are callback for > drm_primary_plane_helper_funcs and *not* drm_primary_plane_funcs. The > naming is intentional. > Yes, that's what tried to say in the commit message and indeed I got the convention from drivers in drivers/gpu/drm/tiny. In fact I believe these function names are since first iteration of the driver, when was meant to be a tiny driver. According to Maxime it's the exception rather than the rule and suggested to change it, I don't really have a strong opinion on either naming TBH. > Best regards > Thomas > -- Best regards, Javier Martinez Canillas Core Platforms Red Hat
