[Freedreno] [PATCH RFC v1 00/52] drm/crtc: Rename struct drm_crtc::dev to drm_dev

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Uwe,

Let's add some fuel to keep the thread alive ;-)

On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 6:13 PM Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig at pengutronix.de> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 05:34:28PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 Jul 2023, Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig at pengutronix.de> wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > while I debugged an issue in the imx-lcdc driver I was constantly
> > > irritated about struct drm_device pointer variables being named "dev"
> > > because with that name I usually expect a struct device pointer.
> > >
> > > I think there is a big benefit when these are all renamed to "drm_dev".
> > > I have no strong preference here though, so "drmdev" or "drm" are fine
> > > for me, too. Let the bikesheding begin!
> > >
> > > Some statistics:
> > >
> > > $ git grep -ohE 'struct drm_device *\* *[^ (),;]*' v6.5-rc1 | sort | uniq -c | sort -n
> > >       1 struct drm_device *adev_to_drm
> > >       1 struct drm_device *drm_
> > >       1 struct drm_device          *drm_dev
> > >       1 struct drm_device        *drm_dev
> > >       1 struct drm_device *pdev
> > >       1 struct drm_device *rdev
> > >       1 struct drm_device *vdev
> > >       2 struct drm_device *dcss_drv_dev_to_drm
> > >       2 struct drm_device **ddev
> > >       2 struct drm_device *drm_dev_alloc
> > >       2 struct drm_device *mock
> > >       2 struct drm_device *p_ddev
> > >       5 struct drm_device *device
> > >       9 struct drm_device * dev
> > >      25 struct drm_device *d
> > >      95 struct drm_device *
> > >     216 struct drm_device *ddev
> > >     234 struct drm_device *drm_dev
> > >     611 struct drm_device *drm
> > >    4190 struct drm_device *dev
> > >
> > > This series starts with renaming struct drm_crtc::dev to drm_dev. If
> > > it's not only me and others like the result of this effort it should be
> > > followed up by adapting the other structs and the individual usages in
> > > the different drivers.
> >
> > I think this is an unnecessary change. In drm, a dev is usually a drm
> > device, i.e. struct drm_device *.
>
> Well, unless it's not. Prominently there is
>
>         struct drm_device {
>                 ...
>                 struct device *dev;
>                 ...
>         };
>
> which yields quite a few code locations using dev->dev which is
> IMHO unnecessary irritating:
>
>         $ git grep '\<dev->dev' v6.5-rc1 drivers/gpu/drm | wc -l
>         1633

I find that irritating as well...

Same for e.g. crtc->crtc.

Hence that's why I had sent patches to rename the base members in the
shmob_drm-specific subclasses of drm_{crtc,connector,plane} to "base".
https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/b3daca80f82625ba14e3aeaf2fca6dcefa056e47.1687423204.git.geert+renesas@glider.be

> Also the functions that deal with both a struct device and a struct
> drm_device often use "dev" for the struct device and then "ddev" for
> the drm_device (see for example amdgpu_device_get_pcie_replay_count()).

I guess you considered "drm_dev", because it is still a short name?
Code dealing with platform devices usually uses "pdev" and "dev".
Same for PCI drivers (despite "pci_dev" being a short name).

So my personal preference goes to "ddev".

EOF (End-of-Fuel ;-)

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert at linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds