On Wednesday, July 10, 2019 2:47:08 PM CEST Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Janusz Krzysztofik (2019-07-10 13:36:25) > > Need for this was identified while working on split of driver unbind > > path into _remove() and _release() parts. Consistency in function > > naming has been recognized as helpful when trying to work out which > > phase the code is in. > > > > What I'm still not sure about is desired depth of that modification - > > how deep should we go down with renaming to not override meaningfull > > function names. Please advise if you think still more deep renaming > > makes sense. > > I did a double take over "driver_release" but by the end I was in > agreement. > > The early_release though, that is worth a bit of artistic license to say > early_probe pairs with late_release. OK, I'll fix it, as well as other issues pointed out by dim, and resubmit. Thanks, Janusz > -Chris > _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
