Re: [PATCH] drm: vmwgfx: constify vmw_fence_ops

From: Thomas Hellstrom
Date: Wed Aug 30 2017 - 05:09:58 EST


On 08/30/2017 10:30 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 08:21:46AM +0200, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
On 08/30/2017 07:47 AM, Arvind Yadav wrote:
vmw_fence_ops are not supposed to change at runtime. Functions
"dma_fence_init" working with const vmw_fence_ops provided
by <linux/dma-fence.h>. So mark the non-const structs as const.

Signed-off-by: Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_fence.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_fence.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_fence.c
index b8bc5bc..abc5f03 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_fence.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_fence.c
@@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ static long vmw_fence_wait(struct dma_fence *f, bool intr, signed long timeout)
return ret;
}
-static struct dma_fence_ops vmw_fence_ops = {
+static const struct dma_fence_ops vmw_fence_ops = {
.get_driver_name = vmw_fence_get_driver_name,
.get_timeline_name = vmw_fence_get_timeline_name,
.enable_signaling = vmw_fence_enable_signaling,
Reviewed-by: Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx>
Does this mean you'll merge it, or does this mean you'll expect someone
else to merge this?

I'm always confused when maintainers reply with an r-b/ack for a patch
only touching their driver, and no further information at all.
-Daniel

For patches only touching our driver, I'd say we're always responsible for sorting out how it's going to be merged.

Since Sinclair is maintaining the vmwgfx trees I thought I'd give him a chance to comment on how he wanted it merged.

/Thomas