[PATCH v2 2/2] drm: nova-drm: Update ioctl handlers to drop Opaque usage

[Beata Michalska]

On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 01:20:51PM +0200, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 01:09:12PM +0200, Beata Michalska wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 11:59:25AM +0200, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> > > On 6/24/25 11:32 AM, Beata Michalska wrote:
> > > > From: Danilo Krummrich <dakr at kernel.org>
> > > > 
> > > > Following the removal of `Opaque<T>` for ioctl arguments in the DRM
> > > > framework, this patch updates the affected driver code to use typed
> > > > references directly.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Danilo Krummrich <dakr at kernel.org>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Beata Michalska <beata.michalska at arm.com>
> > > 
> > > It's very kind you want to attribute the shared diff with a separate patch, but
> > > you have to include this change into patch 1 ("rust: drm: Drop the use of Opaque
> > > for ioctl arguments"), otherwise it still breaks the build intermediately.
> > >
> > It is not so uncommon to send such changes in separate patches, to clearly
> > distinguish the changes, as long as whole series preserves the build.
> > That said, I can still send those as a single patch if that is the requirement.
> 
> I think it is very uncommon; the general rule is that no patch should ever break
> the build.
>
Noted.
> From [1]:
> 
> "When dividing your change into a series of patches, take special care to ensure
> that the kernel builds and runs properly after each patch in the series.
> Developers using `git bisect` to track down a problem can end up splitting your
> patch series at any point; [...]"
> 
> [1] https://docs.kernel.org/process/submitting-patches.html#separate-your-changes
> 
> > > Please feel free to just include the change in your patch -- no need for any
> > > attribution as far as I'm concerned. :)