RE: [Intel-gfx] [V2 1/3] drm/debug: Expose connector's max supported bpc via debugfs

[Jani Nikula]

On Fri, 29 Apr 2022, "Murthy, Arun R"  wrote:
>> +static int output_bpc_show(struct seq_file *m, void *data) {
>
> Can we have a meaningful name instead of 'm' ?
> Upon changing this parameter name, you can have my
> Reviewed-By: Arun R Murthy 

Please keep 'm'. It's by far the most common name for struct seq_file *
in the kernel:

$ git grep -o "struct seq_file \*[a-zA-Z0-9_]\+" | sed 's/^.*:struct seq_file 
\*//' | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | head -5
   2212 m
   1219 seq
   1126 s
135 sf
121 file


BR,
Jani.

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center

RE: [Intel-gfx] [V2 1/3] drm/debug: Expose connector's max supported bpc via debugfs

[Murthy, Arun R]

> +static int output_bpc_show(struct seq_file *m, void *data) {

Can we have a meaningful name instead of 'm' ?
Upon changing this parameter name, you can have my
Reviewed-By: Arun R Murthy 

Thanks and Regards,
Arun R Murthy

Re: [Intel-gfx] [V2 1/3] drm/debug: Expose connector's max supported bpc via debugfs

[Modem, Bhanuprakash]

On Tue-12-04-2022 08:37 am, Murthy, Arun R wrote:

+static int output_bpc_show(struct seq_file *m, void *data) {


Would it be better to have this function name as drm_output_bpc_show()


As we are using DEFINE_SHOW_ATTRIBUTE() to define file_operations, this 
function name must be _show(). Otherwise, either we need 
to define new file_operations to use the suggested name or rename the 
debugfs name to "drm_output_bpc"


Also, to align/maintain uniform with other debugfs, I think it's ok to 
use output_bpc_show().


- Bhanu



Thanks and Regards,
Arun R Murthy

RE: [Intel-gfx] [V2 1/3] drm/debug: Expose connector's max supported bpc via debugfs

[Murthy, Arun R]

> +static int output_bpc_show(struct seq_file *m, void *data) {

Would it be better to have this function name as drm_output_bpc_show()

Thanks and Regards,
Arun R Murthy