On 4/11/22 21:41, Serge Semin wrote: > I beg your pardon what convention? Is it defined in someplace of the > subsystem docs? If it's not then how should I know about that? These > are the device-specific macro. The static methods below are also > platform-specific and the standard kernel coding style doesn't specify > any rule about that. Moreover the most of the AHCI glue drivers (LLDD > like ahci_mtk.c, ahci_ceva.c, ahci_brcm.c, ahci_st.c, ahci_tegra.c, > ahci_xgene.c, etc) use the same prefixing style as I do here. Finally > the prefix reflects the actual device name "DWC AHCI". So if there is > no subsystem-specific restrictions I normally define the prefix in > that order for the sake of the clarity. Look at how other ahci drivers have named things. That's the "convention" I am talking about. Most of them name things ahci_xxx_... Same for macros. > > Note I don't mind to convert the code to being the way you ask, but if > it's really the AHCI-specific codying style convention then it would be > very useful to have it described/advertised in some place in the > kernel so to know about that beforehead for the developers reference. > So do you insist on switching the words order in the names prefix here? It is nice to have code consistency in the naming. That always facilitate grepping the code. -- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research
