[PATCH 4/5] drm/xe: Rename internal vram helper function

[Lucas De Marchi]

On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 03:52:14PM GMT, Jani Nikula wrote:
>On Wed, 29 May 2024, Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko at intel.com> wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>> but then it should be treated as an exception, to be approved by the
>> maintainer, from general guidelines that maintainers can still document
>
>I'll just note that I only provided some points of view for
>consideration, won't argue them further, and I'll just defer to the xe
>maintainers to provide the guidelines here. (What a nice feeling to be
>able to do so. ;)

I very much prefer dropping the prefix for static functions.  If there's
a clash with a global one, either a) you're including too much b) you
should use a better name or c) the global one could use a better
name.... An often we can just add the second part of the prefix, just
leaving the xe_ out, which makes those clashes go away. It makes a clear
separation of what can be use in a single compilation unit vs what is
calling something from outside.

IMO platform prefixes and double underscores that i915 uses are also
bad:  a compilation unit should abstract it with proper layer of
separation, otherwise it made a bad abstraction.

Lucas De Marchi

>
>BR,
>Jani.
>
>-- 
>Jani Nikula, Intel