[PATCH 01/59] drm/todo: Improve drm_gem_object funcs todo

[Daniel Vetter]

On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 05:47:50PM +0200, Noralf Trønnes wrote:
> 
> 
> Den 14.06.2019 22.35, skrev Daniel Vetter:
> > We're kinda going in the wrong direction. Spotted while typing better
> > gem/prime docs.
> > 
> > Cc: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann at suse.de>
> > Cc: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel at redhat.com>
> > Cc: Rob Herring <robh at kernel.org>
> > Cc: Noralf Trønnes <noralf at tronnes.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at intel.com>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/gpu/todo.rst | 4 ++++
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/gpu/todo.rst b/Documentation/gpu/todo.rst
> > index b4a76c2703e5..23583f0e3755 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/gpu/todo.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/gpu/todo.rst
> > @@ -228,6 +228,10 @@ struct drm_gem_object_funcs
> >  GEM objects can now have a function table instead of having the callbacks on the
> >  DRM driver struct. This is now the preferred way and drivers can be moved over.
> >  
> > +Unfortunately some of the recently added GEM helpers are going in the wrong
> > +direction by adding OPS macros that use the old, deprecated hooks. See
> > +DRM_GEM_CMA_VMAP_DRIVER_OPS, DRM_GEM_SHMEM_DRIVER_OPS, and DRM_GEM_VRAM_DRIVER_PRIME.
> > +
> 
> Both DRM_GEM_CMA_VMAP_DRIVER_OPS and DRM_GEM_SHMEM_DRIVER_OPS use the
> GEM vtable. Or am I missing something here?

gem vtable I mean drm_gem_object_funcs. Which these macros definitely
aren't useful for.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch