Quoting Michal Wajdeczko (2017-11-14 14:54:09) > On Tue, 14 Nov 2017 13:31:44 +0100, Chris Wilson > <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Quoting Michal Wajdeczko (2017-11-14 12:23:18) > >> On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 09:48:11 +0100, Sagar Arun Kamble > >> > -static void i915_guc_submission_unpark(struct intel_engine_cs > >> *engine) > >> > +static void intel_guc_submission_unpark(struct intel_engine_cs > >> *engine) > >> > >> Both park/unpark are also static and do not require "intel" prefix. > > > > Hooks are an interesting one, because they are exported via the vfuncs > > even though they are static. Here, the export is onto to other i915 > > functions so it is reasonably clear, but if we export a vfunc further > > afield having the intel_ prefix is useful to mark the boundary into our > > module. > > Note that our boundary is already visible/available when using %pF format. > See some examples below: > > [ 98.279612] i915_init+0x6b/0x6e [i915] > ^^^^ > [ 67.109688] [drm:intel_device_info_dump [i915]] ... > ^^^^ True. I shall keep my comments to userspace then ;) -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
