Re: [PATCH v9 0/8] drm: Remove usage of deprecated DRM_* macros

From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
To: Siddh Raman Pant <code@siddh.me>
Cc: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>,
	Robert Foss <rfoss@kernel.org>,
	Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@intel.com>,
	Jonas Karlman <jonas@kwiboo.se>,
	Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
	dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>,
	Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>,
	Suraj Upadhyay <usuraj35@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 0/8] drm: Remove usage of deprecated DRM_* macros
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2023 07:30:41 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230607043041.GE14101@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <18891edf10b.42f0ffa4128414.8582548531031990480@siddh.me>

On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 11:47:50PM +0530, Siddh Raman Pant wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Jun 2023 23:19:28 +0530, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > The idea would be to include the drm_print_deprecated.h header in
> > drivers that still use the deprecated macros.
> 
> Yeah, what I meant was in a "first pass" kind of sense.
> 
> > > Not every file can be seen at a case-by-case basis or by coccinelle
> > > as far as I understand its usage. Consider the following:
> > > 
> > > DRM_INFO is used on line 210 of amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_acpi.c, but the
> > > file does not even include drm_print.h directly. It includes the
> > > amdgpu.h header, which includes the amdgpu_ring.h header, which
> > > finally has the "#include " line.
> > > 
> > > If a simple find and replace has to be done, then that can be added
> > > at the end of the series.
> > 
> > Maybe a simple grep for the deprecated macros would be enough to
> > identify all the files that still use them ?
> 
> Hmm, so the drm_print_deprecated.h should be included individually on
> all the files, regardless of whether they include drm_print.h directly
> or not?
> 
> Actually that makes sense, so further inclusion of top-level header
> would not automatically include the deprecated macros.

That's the idea, yes. It would also clearly flag drivers that need to be
converted to the new macros.

> Since this needs some thought, I will be sending v10 without this.
> This change can be sent later separately, as it will anyways be a
> huge patch, and 10 is already a big enough revision number.

Sounds good to me.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart