Re: [Freedreno] [PATCH RFC v1 00/52] drm/crtc: Rename struct drm_crtc::dev to drm_dev

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On 12/07/2023 20:31, Sean Paul wrote:
>>>     216 struct drm_device *ddev
>>>     234 struct drm_device *drm_dev
>>>     611 struct drm_device *drm
>>>    4190 struct drm_device *dev
>>> This series starts with renaming struct drm_crtc::dev to drm_dev. If
>>> it's not only me and others like the result of this effort it should be
>>> followed up by adapting the other structs and the individual usages in
>>> the different drivers.
>> I think this is an unnecessary change. In drm, a dev is usually a drm
>> device, i.e. struct drm_device *. As shown by the numbers above.
> I'd really prefer this patch (series or single) is not accepted. This
> will cause problems for everyone cherry-picking patches to a
> downstream kernel (LTS or distro tree). I usually wouldn't expect
> sympathy here, but the questionable benefit does not outweigh the cost
> IM[biased]O.

You know, every code cleanup and style adjustment is interfering with
backporting. The only argument for a fast-pacing kernel should be
whether the developers of this code find it more readable with such cleanup.

Best regards,

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Virtualization]     [Linux Virtualization]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]     [Monitors]