| Message ID | 20250618141555.5434-1-kisub.choe.0x1@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | staging: sm750fb: rename 'proc_setBLANK' | expand |
On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 11:15:55PM +0900, Kisub Choe wrote: > Rename 'proc_setBLANK' to 'proc_setBLANK' to That doesn't rename anything :( > conform with kernel style guidelines as reported by checkpatch.pl > > CHECK: Avoid CamelCase: <proc_setBLANK> > > Signed-off-by: Kisub Choe <kisub.choe.0x1@gmail.com> > --- > drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c | 4 ++-- > drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.h | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c > index 1d929aca399c..bb2ade6030c2 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c > +++ b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c > @@ -577,7 +577,7 @@ static int lynxfb_ops_blank(int blank, struct fb_info *info) > pr_debug("blank = %d.\n", blank); > par = info->par; > output = &par->output; > - return output->proc_setBLANK(output, blank); > + return output->proc_set_blank(output, blank); > } > > static int sm750fb_set_drv(struct lynxfb_par *par) > @@ -605,7 +605,7 @@ static int sm750fb_set_drv(struct lynxfb_par *par) > crtc->ypanstep = 1; > crtc->ywrapstep = 0; > > - output->proc_setBLANK = (sm750_dev->revid == SM750LE_REVISION_ID) ? > + output->proc_set_blank = (sm750_dev->revid == SM750LE_REVISION_ID) ? > hw_sm750le_set_blank : hw_sm750_set_blank; Why do we even need this function pointer? Why not just do the check above when it is called instead of this indirection? thanks, greg k-h
On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 04:26:10PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 11:15:55PM +0900, Kisub Choe wrote: > > Rename 'proc_setBLANK' to 'proc_setBLANK' to > > That doesn't rename anything :( Rename 'proc_setBLANK' to 'proc_set_blank' to > > > > > conform with kernel style guidelines as reported by checkpatch.pl > > > > CHECK: Avoid CamelCase: <proc_setBLANK> > > > > Signed-off-by: Kisub Choe <kisub.choe.0x1@gmail.com> > > --- > > drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c | 4 ++-- > > drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.h | 2 +- > > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c > > index 1d929aca399c..bb2ade6030c2 100644 > > --- a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c > > +++ b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c > > @@ -577,7 +577,7 @@ static int lynxfb_ops_blank(int blank, struct fb_info *info) > > pr_debug("blank = %d.\n", blank); > > par = info->par; > > output = &par->output; > > - return output->proc_setBLANK(output, blank); > > + return output->proc_set_blank(output, blank); > > } > > > > static int sm750fb_set_drv(struct lynxfb_par *par) > > @@ -605,7 +605,7 @@ static int sm750fb_set_drv(struct lynxfb_par *par) > > crtc->ypanstep = 1; > > crtc->ywrapstep = 0; > > > > - output->proc_setBLANK = (sm750_dev->revid == SM750LE_REVISION_ID) ? > > + output->proc_set_blank = (sm750_dev->revid == SM750LE_REVISION_ID) ? > > hw_sm750le_set_blank : hw_sm750_set_blank; > > Why do we even need this function pointer? Why not just do the check > above when it is called instead of this indirection? > > thanks, > > greg k-h Dear Greg, Here is the updated patch with revised commit message. No code changes. Regards, Kisub Choe.
On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 03:24:26PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 10:12:13PM +0900, Kisub Choe wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 04:26:10PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 11:15:55PM +0900, Kisub Choe wrote: > > > > Rename 'proc_setBLANK' to 'proc_setBLANK' to > > > > > > That doesn't rename anything :( > > Rename 'proc_setBLANK' to 'proc_set_blank' to > > > > > > > > > > > > > conform with kernel style guidelines as reported by checkpatch.pl > > > > > > > > CHECK: Avoid CamelCase: <proc_setBLANK> > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Kisub Choe <kisub.choe.0x1@gmail.com> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c | 4 ++-- > > > > drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.h | 2 +- > > > > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c > > > > index 1d929aca399c..bb2ade6030c2 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c > > > > @@ -577,7 +577,7 @@ static int lynxfb_ops_blank(int blank, struct fb_info *info) > > > > pr_debug("blank = %d.\n", blank); > > > > par = info->par; > > > > output = &par->output; > > > > - return output->proc_setBLANK(output, blank); > > > > + return output->proc_set_blank(output, blank); > > > > } > > > > > > > > static int sm750fb_set_drv(struct lynxfb_par *par) > > > > @@ -605,7 +605,7 @@ static int sm750fb_set_drv(struct lynxfb_par *par) > > > > crtc->ypanstep = 1; > > > > crtc->ywrapstep = 0; > > > > > > > > - output->proc_setBLANK = (sm750_dev->revid == SM750LE_REVISION_ID) ? > > > > + output->proc_set_blank = (sm750_dev->revid == SM750LE_REVISION_ID) ? > > > > hw_sm750le_set_blank : hw_sm750_set_blank; > > > > > > Why do we even need this function pointer? Why not just do the check > > > above when it is called instead of this indirection? > > > > > > thanks, > > > > > > greg k-h > > > > Dear Greg, > > > > Here is the updated patch with revised commit message. No code changes. > > Please read the documentation for how to send an updated patch (hint, it > needs to be a new version). > > Also, see my comments above about what you should do here instead of > just renaming the variable. Please make that change which will remove > the variable entirely. > > thanks, > > greg k-h Thank you for feedback. I was wondering if you could share additional feedback regarding pros and cons calling a function directly based on the condition instead of the current implementation? Regards, Kisub Choe.
On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 03:52:53PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 10:49:24PM +0900, Kisub Choe wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 03:24:26PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 10:12:13PM +0900, Kisub Choe wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 04:26:10PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 11:15:55PM +0900, Kisub Choe wrote: > > > > > > Rename 'proc_setBLANK' to 'proc_setBLANK' to > > > > > > > > > > That doesn't rename anything :( > > > > Rename 'proc_setBLANK' to 'proc_set_blank' to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > conform with kernel style guidelines as reported by checkpatch.pl > > > > > > > > > > > > CHECK: Avoid CamelCase: <proc_setBLANK> > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Kisub Choe <kisub.choe.0x1@gmail.com> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c | 4 ++-- > > > > > > drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.h | 2 +- > > > > > > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c > > > > > > index 1d929aca399c..bb2ade6030c2 100644 > > > > > > --- a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c > > > > > > @@ -577,7 +577,7 @@ static int lynxfb_ops_blank(int blank, struct fb_info *info) > > > > > > pr_debug("blank = %d.\n", blank); > > > > > > par = info->par; > > > > > > output = &par->output; > > > > > > - return output->proc_setBLANK(output, blank); > > > > > > + return output->proc_set_blank(output, blank); > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > static int sm750fb_set_drv(struct lynxfb_par *par) > > > > > > @@ -605,7 +605,7 @@ static int sm750fb_set_drv(struct lynxfb_par *par) > > > > > > crtc->ypanstep = 1; > > > > > > crtc->ywrapstep = 0; > > > > > > > > > > > > - output->proc_setBLANK = (sm750_dev->revid == SM750LE_REVISION_ID) ? > > > > > > + output->proc_set_blank = (sm750_dev->revid == SM750LE_REVISION_ID) ? > > > > > > hw_sm750le_set_blank : hw_sm750_set_blank; > > > > > > > > > > Why do we even need this function pointer? Why not just do the check > > > > > above when it is called instead of this indirection? > > > > > > > > > > thanks, > > > > > > > > > > greg k-h > > > > > > > > Dear Greg, > > > > > > > > Here is the updated patch with revised commit message. No code changes. > > > > > > Please read the documentation for how to send an updated patch (hint, it > > > needs to be a new version). > > > > > > Also, see my comments above about what you should do here instead of > > > just renaming the variable. Please make that change which will remove > > > the variable entirely. > > > > > > thanks, > > > > > > greg k-h > > > > Thank you for feedback. > > > > I was wondering if you could share additional feedback regarding > > pros and cons calling a function directly based on the condition instead of the > > current implementation? > > I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader to complete :) > > have fun! > > greg k-h Thank you! Let me try to make changes and update. Regards, Kisub Choe.
diff --git a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c index 1d929aca399c..bb2ade6030c2 100644 --- a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c +++ b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c @@ -577,7 +577,7 @@ static int lynxfb_ops_blank(int blank, struct fb_info *info) pr_debug("blank = %d.\n", blank); par = info->par; output = &par->output; - return output->proc_setBLANK(output, blank); + return output->proc_set_blank(output, blank); } static int sm750fb_set_drv(struct lynxfb_par *par) @@ -605,7 +605,7 @@ static int sm750fb_set_drv(struct lynxfb_par *par) crtc->ypanstep = 1; crtc->ywrapstep = 0; - output->proc_setBLANK = (sm750_dev->revid == SM750LE_REVISION_ID) ? + output->proc_set_blank = (sm750_dev->revid == SM750LE_REVISION_ID) ? hw_sm750le_set_blank : hw_sm750_set_blank; /* chip specific phase */ sm750_dev->accel.de_wait = (sm750_dev->revid == SM750LE_REVISION_ID) ? diff --git a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.h b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.h index 9cf8b3d30aac..40051798efbf 100644 --- a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.h +++ b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.h @@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ struct lynxfb_output { */ void *priv; - int (*proc_setBLANK)(struct lynxfb_output *output, int blank); + int (*proc_set_blank)(struct lynxfb_output *output, int blank); }; struct lynxfb_par {
Rename 'proc_setBLANK' to 'proc_setBLANK' to conform with kernel style guidelines as reported by checkpatch.pl CHECK: Avoid CamelCase: <proc_setBLANK> Signed-off-by: Kisub Choe <kisub.choe.0x1@gmail.com> --- drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c | 4 ++-- drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.h | 2 +- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)