Re: [PATCH drm-misc-next v7 4/7] drm/gpuvm: add an abstraction for a VM / BO combination

[Danilo Krummrich]

On 10/31/23 17:50, Thomas Hellström wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-10-31 at 17:30 +0100, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> > On 10/31/23 12:45, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > On Tue, 31 Oct 2023, Thomas Hellström
> > > <thomas.hellstrom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2023-10-23 at 22:16 +0200, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> > > > > + * Returns: a pointer to the &drm_gpuvm_bo on success, NULL on
> > > >
> > > > Still needs s/Returns:/Return:/g
> > >
> > > FWIW, both work to accommodate the variance across the kernel,
> > > although
> > > I think only the latter is documented and recommended. It's also
> > > the
> > > most popular:
> > >
> > >     10577 Return
> > >      3596 Returns
> >
> > I'd like to keep "Returns", since that's what GPUVM uses already
> > everywhere else.
>
> Ok. It looks like the Returns: are converted to Return in the rendered
> output so I guess that's why it's the form that is documented.
>
> I pointed this out since in the last review you replied you were going
> to change it, and also when the code starts seeing updates from other,
> it might become inconsistent if those patches follow the documented
> way.

Sorry for that. I think I wrote this answer when I was at XDC and hence was
a little bit distracted.

> But I'm OK either way.

Ok, then let's just keep it as it is.

> /Thomas
>
>
> > >      1104 RETURN
> > >       568 return
> > >       367 returns
> > >       352 RETURNS
> > >         1 RETURNs
> > >
> > > BR,
> > > Jani.