Re: [PATCH] i2c: at91: use dma safe buffers

[Christian König]

Am 04.03.22 um 09:04 schrieb Wolfram Sang:
> Hi Christian,
>
> > Maybe call your variable differently. DMA-buf is an inter driver buffer
> > sharing frame we use for GPU acceleration and V4L.
> >
> > It doesn't cause any technical issues, but the maintainer regex now triggers
> > on that. So you are CCing people not related to this code in any way.
> Frankly, I think the 'dma_buf' regex is a bit too generic. 'dma_buf'
> seems like a reasonable name to me if some subsystem has to deal with
> different buffers which can be DMA or non-DMA, like I2C. If you git-grep
> the tree, you will find it in quite some places.
>
> We could now think of renaming the variable to 'dmabuf' but this is
> a strange and kind of arbitrary rule to remember IMO.
>
> I wonder if you'd miss a lot of patches if we remove 'dma_buf' from the
> regex and keep 'dma_fence' and 'dma_resv'? Or extend it to 'dma_buf_' or
> 'struct dma_buf'?

Yeah, I'm already considering something similar for a while.

I'm getting quite a bunch of unrelated mails because the regex is not 
the best.

On the other hand the framework is used in a lot of drivers and I do 
want to be notified when they mess with their interfaces.

Going to take a another look at that when I have time.

Thanks,
Christian.

> All the best,
>
>     Wolfram