On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 10:31:21AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 11:35:56PM -0700, Pavle Rohalj wrote:
> > Fix "Avoid CamelCase" checkpatch.pl checks for dvi_ctrl_device structure and
> > its usages.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Pavle Rohalj <pavle.rohalj@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_dvi.c | 30 ++++++++--------
> > drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_dvi.h | 20 +++++------
> > drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_sii164.c | 48 ++++++++++++-------------
> > drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_sii164.h | 20 +++++------
> > 4 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 59 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_dvi.c b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_dvi.c
> > index cd564ea40779..db19bf732482 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_dvi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_dvi.c
> > @@ -11,20 +11,20 @@
> > * function API. Please set the function pointer to NULL whenever the function
> > * is not supported.
> > */
> > -static struct dvi_ctrl_device g_dcftSupportedDviController[] = {
> > +static struct dvi_ctrl_device dcft_supported_dvi_controller[] = {
>
> Why the "dcft_" prefix? We know this is a "dvi control device" by the
> fact that the type says it is :)
>
Didn't catch that--makes sense.
> > #ifdef DVI_CTRL_SII164
> > {
> > - .pfnInit = sii164InitChip,
> > - .pfnGetVendorId = sii164GetVendorID,
> > - .pfnGetDeviceId = sii164GetDeviceID,
> > + .pfn_init = sii164_init_chip,
> > + .pfn_get_vendor_id = sii164_get_vendor_id,
> > + .pfn_get_device_id = sii164_get_device_id,
> > #ifdef SII164_FULL_FUNCTIONS
> > - .pfnResetChip = sii164ResetChip,
> > - .pfnGetChipString = sii164GetChipString,
> > - .pfnSetPower = sii164SetPower,
> > - .pfnEnableHotPlugDetection = sii164EnableHotPlugDetection,
> > - .pfnIsConnected = sii164IsConnected,
> > - .pfnCheckInterrupt = sii164CheckInterrupt,
> > - .pfnClearInterrupt = sii164ClearInterrupt,
> > + .pfn_reset_chip = sii164_reset_chip,
> > + .pfn_get_chip_string = sii164_get_chip_string,
> > + .pfn_set_power = sii164_set_power,
> > + .pfn_enable_hot_plug_detection = sii164_enable_hot_plug_detection,
> > + .pfn_is_connected = sii164_is_connected,
> > + .pfn_check_interrupt = sii164_check_interrupt,
> > + .pfn_clear_interrupt = sii164_clear_interrupt,
> > #endif
> > },
> > #endif
> > @@ -41,11 +41,11 @@ int dviInit(unsigned char edge_select,
> > unsigned char pll_filter_enable,
> > unsigned char pll_filter_value)
> > {
> > - struct dvi_ctrl_device *pCurrentDviCtrl;
> > + struct dvi_ctrl_device *current_dvi_ctrl;
> >
> > - pCurrentDviCtrl = g_dcftSupportedDviController;
> > - if (pCurrentDviCtrl->pfnInit) {
> > - return pCurrentDviCtrl->pfnInit(edge_select,
> > + current_dvi_ctrl = dcft_supported_dvi_controller;
> > + if (current_dvi_ctrl->pfn_init) {
> > + return current_dvi_ctrl->pfn_init(edge_select,
> > bus_select,
> > dual_edge_clk_select,
> > hsync_enable,
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_dvi.h b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_dvi.h
> > index 1c7a565b617a..4ca2591ea94b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_dvi.h
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_dvi.h
> > @@ -27,16 +27,16 @@ typedef void (*PFN_DVICTRL_CLEARINTERRUPT)(void);
> >
> > /* Structure to hold all the function pointer to the DVI Controller. */
> > struct dvi_ctrl_device {
> > - PFN_DVICTRL_INIT pfnInit;
> > - PFN_DVICTRL_RESETCHIP pfnResetChip;
> > - PFN_DVICTRL_GETCHIPSTRING pfnGetChipString;
> > - PFN_DVICTRL_GETVENDORID pfnGetVendorId;
> > - PFN_DVICTRL_GETDEVICEID pfnGetDeviceId;
> > - PFN_DVICTRL_SETPOWER pfnSetPower;
> > - PFN_DVICTRL_HOTPLUGDETECTION pfnEnableHotPlugDetection;
> > - PFN_DVICTRL_ISCONNECTED pfnIsConnected;
> > - PFN_DVICTRL_CHECKINTERRUPT pfnCheckInterrupt;
> > - PFN_DVICTRL_CLEARINTERRUPT pfnClearInterrupt;
> > + PFN_DVICTRL_INIT pfn_init;
>
> "pfn_" means "pointer to a function" which is not needed at all. Just
> make this be "init".
>
I changed that in one of the next few patches, but now I realize I should have
combined the two changes.
> And the whole crazy "PFN_DVICTRL_INIT" also is not needed, just put the
> real function prototype in here so that we don't have to unwind the mess
> to look it up.
>
> So, this line would look like:
> void (*init)(void);
>
> Much smaller, more obvious, matches the kernel coding style, and is way
> easier to understand exactly what is happening here.
>
> Typedefs can be used to hide complexity, but here they are just adding
> it, for no good reason at all.
>
> I appreciate long patch series being sent out, but maybe make them
> smaller so you do not have to redo 49 patches because you are asked to
> make a change on the very first patch like here. Perhaps stick to 20
> max for a bit until you get the process down and understand more about
> what the kernel programming style is?
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Sounds good. Thank you for the feedback. I will work more on this.
-Pavle
