Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] drm/i915/guc: Update name and prototype of i915_guc_log_control

From: Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@intel.com>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
	Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] drm/i915/guc: Update name and prototype of i915_guc_log_control
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 16:23:36 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b4d04ac8-0998-9c7f-14c4-f0be5dbfd980@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <151678868019.13096.7707540084313696717@mail.alporthouse.com>


On 1/24/2018 3:41 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Michal Wajdeczko (2018-01-24 10:07:12)
>> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 05:09:10 +0100, Sagar Arun Kamble
>> <sagar.a.kamble@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>>> i915_guc_log_control is GuC interface and GuC APIs that are not user
>>> facing should be named with "intel_guc" prefix hence we change name to
>>> intel_guc_log_control. Also changed the parameter to intel_guc struct.
>>>
>>> Suggested-by: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@intel.com>
>>> Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>
>>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>> ---
>> Reviewed-by: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>
>>
>> with small bikeshed below
>>
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c  | 5 +++--
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_log.c | 4 ++--
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_log.h | 2 +-
>>>   3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>>> index b45be0d..c10a9e8 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>>> @@ -2467,14 +2467,15 @@ static int i915_guc_log_control_get(void *data,
>>> u64 *val)
>>>   static int i915_guc_log_control_set(void *data, u64 val)
>>>   {
>>>        struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = data;
>>> +     struct intel_guc *guc = &dev_priv->guc;
>>>        if (!HAS_GUC(dev_priv))
>>>                return -ENODEV;
>>> -     if (!dev_priv->guc.log.vma)
>>> +     if (!guc->log.vma)
>>>                return -EINVAL;
>> Hmm, as this looks like internal check, maybe better to move
>> it into intel_guc_log_control() ?
>>
>> Also, I'm not sure that lack of internal vma should be reported
>> as -EINVAL
> Right, it's not reporting that the user's parameter was wrong, just that
> the device wasn't initialised, so ENODEV seems appropriate.
Thanks for the review and inputs.
> -Chris

-- 
Thanks,
Sagar

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx