Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 21 Apr 2022 10:34:20 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/nvdla: Add driver support for NVDLA | From | Christian König <> |
| |
Am 21.04.22 um 10:30 schrieb Thomas Zimmermann: > (Resending, as some MLs didn't like the size of the origninal mail.) > > Hi, > > thanks for your submission. Some general comments: > > * some functions are prefixed with dla_, others use nvdla_. It seems > arbitrary to me. Please use nvdla_ consistently throughout the source > code. > > * For reporting errors, please use drm_err(), drm_warn(), etc. I > suggest to rearrange the error messages to not be located in the > innermost functions.
If you plan to have multiple instances of the driver loaded at the same time, using drm_dev_err(), drm_dev_warn() etc.. would be even better.
BTW: I'm still absolutely not keen to enforcing drm_* log functions. So if you prefer to stick with pr_err() and dev_err() we could discuss that once more.
Regards, Christian.
> > * Could you please split this patch into smaller pieces? It > currently hits size limits of some mailing lists. Maybe add the > register constants separately. > > Please find more review comments below. It's not a full review, but at > least something to start with. > > Best regards > Thomas
| |