On 3/20/2018 6:30 PM, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 08:24:14 +0100, Sagar Arun Kamble
<sagar.a.kamble@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 3/19/2018 8:58 PM, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
There is no need to mix parameter types in public CT functions
as we can always accept intel_guc_ct.
Signed-off-by: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<snip>
/**
- * Enable buffer based command transport
+ * intel_guc_ct_enable - Enable buffer based command transport.
+ * @ct: pointer to CT struct
+ *
* Shall only be called for platforms with HAS_GUC_CT.
- * @guc: the guc
- * return: 0 on success
- * non-zero on failure
+ *
+ * Returns:
+ * 0 on success, a negative errno code on failure.
Should be
* Return: 0 on sucess ...
hmm, I'm not so sure:
$ grep -r "\* Return: .*" drivers/gpu/drm/* | wc -l
153
$ grep -r "\* Returns:$" drivers/gpu/drm/* | wc -l
344
Hi Michal,
kernel-doc rules recommend "Return:".
Thanks,
Sagar
*/
-int intel_guc_enable_ct(struct intel_guc *guc)
+int intel_guc_ct_enable(struct intel_guc_ct *ct)
{
+ struct intel_guc *guc = ct_to_guc(ct);
struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = guc_to_i915(guc);
change to *i915 as part of this patch itself? :) similar for disable.
sure
Otherwise LGTM
Reviewed-by: Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@xxxxxxxxx>
thanks
/m
--
Thanks,
Sagar
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
