Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 00/14] Rename dma-buf-map

2022-02-09 Thread Lucas De Marchi

On Tue, Feb 01, 2022 at 08:46:15AM +0100, Christian König wrote:

Am 01.02.22 um 01:36 schrieb Lucas De Marchi:

On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 10:48:42AM +0100, Christian König wrote:

Am 28.01.22 um 10:40 schrieb Lucas De Marchi:

On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 10:22:00AM +0100, Christian König wrote:

Am 28.01.22 um 10:12 schrieb Lucas De Marchi:

On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 09:41:14AM +0100, Christian König wrote:

Rule #1 is to never ever break the build.

Because of this all those patches needs to be squashed 
into a single one as far as I can see.


what config are you building on?


Well I'm not building at all, I'm just looking at the patches 
as an engineer with 25 years of experience with Linux patches.


Just take a look at patch number 2:

-static int fastrpc_vmap(struct dma_buf *dmabuf, struct 
dma_buf_map *map)
+static int fastrpc_vmap(struct dma_buf *dmabuf, struct 
iosys_map *map)


You are changing the functions signature without changing any 
of the callers.


At bare minimum that causes a warning and on runtime this only 
works by coincident now because the structure pointers just 
happen to have the same layout. This is not something we 
usually do.


you missed the magic/hack on patch 1:

1) dma-buf-map.h includes iosys-map.h _at the end_
2) iosys-map.h includes dma-buf-map.h at the beginning
   and initially does a "define iosys_map dma_buf_map".

So, it doesn't work by coincidence, It's because it was done to allow
converting it piecemeal.


Oh, my. Please never do stuff like that again.


It's not uncommon approach to be required by other subsystems. Even
drm-intel already used similar approach for macro conversions crossing
drm-intel-next and drm-intel-gt-next branches recently.  As I said, I
don't mind one way or the other.


The key point is that you seemed to have a misunderstanding why we 
separate changes into functional independent patches.


The goal of that is *not* to reduce the number of lines in a patch, 
but rather to reduce the complexity of the review.


When you do an automated renamed with a cocci or sed script you can 
have a 100k line patch as result, which is perfectly fine to send out 
like this as long as you include the script/commands used to 
autogenerate the patch.


The background is that everybody on the planet can generate the patch 
with those commands himself and see if the results matches your patch 


no, as I said in the cover letter there were tweaks needed.

or not. The maintainer of the component can then just puts an Acked-by 
on the patch and move on, but separating the patch causes additional 
work for both you as well as the reviewers.


Separating the change into individual patches as much as possible is 
nice to have when you do a functional change and want or need a review 
from each individual driver maintainer. This is usually the default 
case, so sticking with separated changes as much as possible is 
usually still the best practice.


Not sure if I should continue replying on why I split these specific
patches.  I even mentioned in this cover letter about squashing
everything in a single patch, and I'm fine with that.

Anyway, there are other reasons to split the patches when it crosses
branches you don't seem to acknowledge. It's harder for maintainers of
the specific branches to review/ack only the changes on their part. It's
harder to find the best timing to merge it. The mega patch doesn't apply
to *any* specific branch, potentially leaving silent conflicts behind.
You may notice the patch was split by branch boundary for these very
reasons.

If maintainers prefer to have a single patch, I'm fine, I had already
said that.






Before I go and respin this into a single mega patch, I'd like to gather
some feedback on the following topics:

1) Daniel Vetter and Thomas Zimmermann seemed to be ok with staying with
the current name, dma_buf_map, while you prefer it renamed. Or at
least not make the rename a pre-requisite for the API additions in
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flore.kernel.org%2Fall%2F20220126203702.1784589-1-lucas.demarchi%40intel.com%2Fdata=04%7C01%7Cchristian.koenig%40amd.com%7C01142fa3ce484040ade008d9e51aef5d%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637792726123940514%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000sdata=ieMZ9Jiwo%2FQpT5kyyQgHNlepiusN%2Fkfff1Op6TVQ%2BaA%3Dreserved=0


One thing I like about the rename is that it makes clear the separation
between this small shim and dma-buf. There are also some APIs
that are really dma-buf API (e.g. dma_buf_map_attachment()), but if you
don't look carefully you may think it's from dma_buf_map.


Exactly that's the reason why I see this rename as mandatory.

Adding the functionality goes beyond the inter driver interface 
DMA-buf provides into driver internal territory and I want to make 
sure that people understand just from the name alone that this is not 
part of DMA-buf but rather an 

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 00/14] Rename dma-buf-map

2022-02-09 Thread Lucas De Marchi

On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 10:48:42AM +0100, Christian König wrote:

Am 28.01.22 um 10:40 schrieb Lucas De Marchi:

On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 10:22:00AM +0100, Christian König wrote:

Am 28.01.22 um 10:12 schrieb Lucas De Marchi:

On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 09:41:14AM +0100, Christian König wrote:

Rule #1 is to never ever break the build.

Because of this all those patches needs to be squashed into a 
single one as far as I can see.


what config are you building on?


Well I'm not building at all, I'm just looking at the patches as 
an engineer with 25 years of experience with Linux patches.


Just take a look at patch number 2:

-static int fastrpc_vmap(struct dma_buf *dmabuf, struct 
dma_buf_map *map)

+static int fastrpc_vmap(struct dma_buf *dmabuf, struct iosys_map *map)

You are changing the functions signature without changing any of 
the callers.


At bare minimum that causes a warning and on runtime this only 
works by coincident now because the structure pointers just happen 
to have the same layout. This is not something we usually do.


you missed the magic/hack on patch 1:

1) dma-buf-map.h includes iosys-map.h _at the end_
2) iosys-map.h includes dma-buf-map.h at the beginning
   and initially does a "define iosys_map dma_buf_map".

So, it doesn't work by coincidence, It's because it was done to allow
converting it piecemeal.


Oh, my. Please never do stuff like that again.


It's not uncommon approach to be required by other subsystems. Even
drm-intel already used similar approach for macro conversions crossing
drm-intel-next and drm-intel-gt-next branches recently.  As I said, I
don't mind one way or the other.

Before I go and respin this into a single mega patch, I'd like to gather
some feedback on the following topics:

1) Daniel Vetter and Thomas Zimmermann seemed to be ok with staying with
the current name, dma_buf_map, while you prefer it renamed. Or at
least not make the rename a pre-requisite for the API additions in
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220126203702.1784589-1-lucas.demar...@intel.com/

One thing I like about the rename is that it makes clear the separation
between this small shim and dma-buf. There are also some APIs
that are really dma-buf API (e.g. dma_buf_map_attachment()), but if you
don't look carefully you may think it's from dma_buf_map.

2) If renaming, would it still keep the same entry in
MAINTAINERS? Thomas suggested drivers core, but this all seem to be used
mainly on drm/, with just one exception.

3) If renaming, do we have another preferred name?


thanks
Lucas De Marchi





But as I said, I don't really have a preference. When crossing
subsystems one thing that is hard is that different people have different
preferences on these things. At least squashing now is much easier than
if I had to split it

Try to imagine how much complain I received on going the other way in
25985edcedea6396277003854657b5f3cb31a628 with
2463 files changed, 4252 insertions(+), 4252 deletions(-)


Well exactly that is perfectly fine.

What you do here is applying your personal hack which is absolutely 
not welcomed.


Regards,
Christian.


:)


Lucas De Marchi



Regards,
Christian.


I built this series, full config with
CONFIG_COMPILE_TEST and doing:

git rebase -i  -x "make -j$(nproc)"

I split these patches in a way that wouldn't break the build on 
purpose.
There were a couple that I couldn't build without cross 
compiling: tegra

and rockchip. The others were ok.

I'm not really against squashing everything in one to merge, though.
It will be hard on the conflicts later, but should get the job 
done much

quicker.

Lucas De Marchi



Regards,
Christian.

Am 28.01.22 um 09:36 schrieb Lucas De Marchi:

Motivation for this started in
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flore.kernel.org%2Flkml%2F20220126203702.1784589-1-lucas.demarchi%40intel.com%2Fdata=04%7C01%7Cchristian.koenig%40amd.com%7C635084a520994d35a16e08d9e2423319%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637789596221829397%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000sdata=ruHpD3DbyyqQuZIFEQU%2B2RH31OwsdFnn1v7N4z75U0Y%3Dreserved=0


when trying to extend the dma-buf-map API to cover new use 
cases: help a
single driver with allocations and sharing code paths for IO 
and system

memory. I'm leaving the API additions aside and first renaming the
interface as requested.

There are already some users in tree outside the context of dma-buf
importer/exporter. So before extending the API, let's 
dissociate it from

dma-buf.

The iosys-map.h is introduced in the first patch in a way that allows
the conversion of each driver to happen separately. After all the
conversions are done we can remove the old one, which is the 
last patch.

Another possible way is to squash everything and merge together,
but I believe this would make much harder for review.

The conversion was done with the following semantic patch:

@r1@
@@
- struct 

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 00/14] Rename dma-buf-map

2022-02-01 Thread Thomas Zimmermann

Hi

Am 01.02.22 um 08:46 schrieb Christian König:
[..]

2) If renaming, would it still keep the same entry in
MAINTAINERS? Thomas suggested drivers core, but this all seem to be used
mainly on drm/, with just one exception.


I would just add a complete new entry for this and use Thomas as 
maintainer (with his permission of course) and dri as mailing list.


Sure, no problem.

Best regards
Thomas





3) If renaming, do we have another preferred name?


Nope, as Daniel said the name itself is only bikesheed. What is 
important is that we see this as functionality separated from the inter 
driver interface.


Regards,
Christian.




thanks
Lucas De Marchi





But as I said, I don't really have a preference. When crossing
subsystems one thing that is hard is that different people have 
different

preferences on these things. At least squashing now is much easier than
if I had to split it

Try to imagine how much complain I received on going the other way in
25985edcedea6396277003854657b5f3cb31a628 with
2463 files changed, 4252 insertions(+), 4252 deletions(-)


Well exactly that is perfectly fine.

What you do here is applying your personal hack which is absolutely 
not welcomed.


Regards,
Christian.


:)


Lucas De Marchi



Regards,
Christian.


I built this series, full config with
CONFIG_COMPILE_TEST and doing:

git rebase -i  -x "make -j$(nproc)"

I split these patches in a way that wouldn't break the build on 
purpose.
There were a couple that I couldn't build without cross compiling: 
tegra

and rockchip. The others were ok.

I'm not really against squashing everything in one to merge, though.
It will be hard on the conflicts later, but should get the job 
done much

quicker.

Lucas De Marchi



Regards,
Christian.

Am 28.01.22 um 09:36 schrieb Lucas De Marchi:

Motivation for this started in
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flore.kernel.org%2Flkml%2F20220126203702.1784589-1-lucas.demarchi%40intel.com%2Fdata=04%7C01%7Cchristian.koenig%40amd.com%7C01142fa3ce484040ade008d9e51aef5d%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637792726123940514%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000sdata=p8rR28Hn0yMTbwy%2F7bpiGyG9fAu9kG1VUzX2MF44mcs%3Dreserved=0 




when trying to extend the dma-buf-map API to cover new use 
cases: help a
single driver with allocations and sharing code paths for IO and 
system

memory. I'm leaving the API additions aside and first renaming the
interface as requested.

There are already some users in tree outside the context of dma-buf
importer/exporter. So before extending the API, let's dissociate 
it from

dma-buf.

The iosys-map.h is introduced in the first patch in a way that 
allows

the conversion of each driver to happen separately. After all the
conversions are done we can remove the old one, which is the 
last patch.

Another possible way is to squash everything and merge together,
but I believe this would make much harder for review.

The conversion was done with the following semantic patch:

@r1@
@@
- struct dma_buf_map
+ struct iosys_map

@r2@
@@
(
- DMA_BUF_MAP_INIT_VADDR
+ IOSYS_MAP_INIT_VADDR
|
- dma_buf_map_set_vaddr
+ iosys_map_set_vaddr
|
- dma_buf_map_set_vaddr_iomem
+ iosys_map_set_vaddr_iomem
|
- dma_buf_map_is_equal
+ iosys_map_is_equal
|
- dma_buf_map_is_null
+ iosys_map_is_null
|
- dma_buf_map_is_set
+ iosys_map_is_set
|
- dma_buf_map_clear
+ iosys_map_clear
|
- dma_buf_map_memcpy_to
+ iosys_map_memcpy_to
|
- dma_buf_map_incr
+ iosys_map_incr
)

@@
@@
- #include 
+ #include 

and then some files had their includes adjusted so we can build
everything on each commit in this series. Also some comments 
were update
to remove mentions to dma-buf-map. Simply doing a sed to rename 
didn't

work as dma-buf has some APIs using the dma_buf_map prefix.

Once finalized, I think most of this, if not all, could go 
through the
drm-misc-next branch. I split i915, msm, nouveau, and radeon in 
their

own patches in case it's preferred to take those through their own
trees.

Lucas De Marchi

Lucas De Marchi (14):
  iosys-map: Introduce renamed dma-buf-map
  misc: fastrpc: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  dma-buf: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  media: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  drm/ttm: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  drm: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map in drivers
  drm/i915: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  drm/msm: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  drm/nouveau: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  drm/tegra: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  drm/radeon: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  drm: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map in common code
  Documentation: Refer to iosys-map instead of dma-buf-map
  dma-buf-map: Remove API in favor of iosys-map

 Documentation/driver-api/dma-buf.rst

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 00/14] Rename dma-buf-map

2022-01-28 Thread Lucas De Marchi

On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 10:22:00AM +0100, Christian König wrote:

Am 28.01.22 um 10:12 schrieb Lucas De Marchi:

On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 09:41:14AM +0100, Christian König wrote:

Rule #1 is to never ever break the build.

Because of this all those patches needs to be squashed into a 
single one as far as I can see.


what config are you building on?


Well I'm not building at all, I'm just looking at the patches as an 
engineer with 25 years of experience with Linux patches.


Just take a look at patch number 2:

-static int fastrpc_vmap(struct dma_buf *dmabuf, struct dma_buf_map *map)
+static int fastrpc_vmap(struct dma_buf *dmabuf, struct iosys_map *map)

You are changing the functions signature without changing any of the 
callers.


At bare minimum that causes a warning and on runtime this only works 
by coincident now because the structure pointers just happen to have 
the same layout. This is not something we usually do.


you missed the magic/hack on patch 1:

1) dma-buf-map.h includes iosys-map.h _at the end_
2) iosys-map.h includes dma-buf-map.h at the beginning
   and initially does a "define iosys_map dma_buf_map".

So, it doesn't work by coincidence, It's because it was done to allow
converting it piecemeal.

But as I said, I don't really have a preference. When crossing
subsystems one thing that is hard is that different people have different
preferences on these things. At least squashing now is much easier than
if I had to split it

Try to imagine how much complain I received on going the other way in
25985edcedea6396277003854657b5f3cb31a628 with
2463 files changed, 4252 insertions(+), 4252 deletions(-)
:)


Lucas De Marchi



Regards,
Christian.


I built this series, full config with
CONFIG_COMPILE_TEST and doing:

git rebase -i  -x "make -j$(nproc)"

I split these patches in a way that wouldn't break the build on purpose.
There were a couple that I couldn't build without cross compiling: tegra
and rockchip. The others were ok.

I'm not really against squashing everything in one to merge, though.
It will be hard on the conflicts later, but should get the job done much
quicker.

Lucas De Marchi



Regards,
Christian.

Am 28.01.22 um 09:36 schrieb Lucas De Marchi:

Motivation for this started in
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flore.kernel.org%2Flkml%2F20220126203702.1784589-1-lucas.demarchi%40intel.com%2Fdata=04%7C01%7Cchristian.koenig%40amd.com%7C15bd6767b2fb4b2c027e08d9e23e46af%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637789579371467295%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000sdata=yAllbKjW29SsXA0CMrhK%2BDDvZ1A5CrSptshmsh5vYNQ%3Dreserved=0

when trying to extend the dma-buf-map API to cover new use 
cases: help a

single driver with allocations and sharing code paths for IO and system
memory. I'm leaving the API additions aside and first renaming the
interface as requested.

There are already some users in tree outside the context of dma-buf
importer/exporter. So before extending the API, let's dissociate 
it from

dma-buf.

The iosys-map.h is introduced in the first patch in a way that allows
the conversion of each driver to happen separately. After all the
conversions are done we can remove the old one, which is the 
last patch.

Another possible way is to squash everything and merge together,
but I believe this would make much harder for review.

The conversion was done with the following semantic patch:

@r1@
@@
- struct dma_buf_map
+ struct iosys_map

@r2@
@@
(
- DMA_BUF_MAP_INIT_VADDR
+ IOSYS_MAP_INIT_VADDR
|
- dma_buf_map_set_vaddr
+ iosys_map_set_vaddr
|
- dma_buf_map_set_vaddr_iomem
+ iosys_map_set_vaddr_iomem
|
- dma_buf_map_is_equal
+ iosys_map_is_equal
|
- dma_buf_map_is_null
+ iosys_map_is_null
|
- dma_buf_map_is_set
+ iosys_map_is_set
|
- dma_buf_map_clear
+ iosys_map_clear
|
- dma_buf_map_memcpy_to
+ iosys_map_memcpy_to
|
- dma_buf_map_incr
+ iosys_map_incr
)

@@
@@
- #include 
+ #include 

and then some files had their includes adjusted so we can build
everything on each commit in this series. Also some comments 
were update

to remove mentions to dma-buf-map. Simply doing a sed to rename didn't
work as dma-buf has some APIs using the dma_buf_map prefix.

Once finalized, I think most of this, if not all, could go through the
drm-misc-next branch. I split i915, msm, nouveau, and radeon in their
own patches in case it's preferred to take those through their own
trees.

Lucas De Marchi

Lucas De Marchi (14):
  iosys-map: Introduce renamed dma-buf-map
  misc: fastrpc: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  dma-buf: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  media: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  drm/ttm: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  drm: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map in drivers
  drm/i915: Replace dma-buf-map with 

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 00/14] Rename dma-buf-map

2022-01-28 Thread Lucas De Marchi

On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 09:41:14AM +0100, Christian König wrote:

Rule #1 is to never ever break the build.

Because of this all those patches needs to be squashed into a single 
one as far as I can see.


what config are you building on? I built this series, full config with
CONFIG_COMPILE_TEST and doing:

git rebase -i  -x "make -j$(nproc)"

I split these patches in a way that wouldn't break the build on purpose.
There were a couple that I couldn't build without cross compiling: tegra
and rockchip. The others were ok.

I'm not really against squashing everything in one to merge, though.
It will be hard on the conflicts later, but should get the job done much
quicker.

Lucas De Marchi



Regards,
Christian.

Am 28.01.22 um 09:36 schrieb Lucas De Marchi:

Motivation for this started in
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220126203702.1784589-1-lucas.demar...@intel.com/
when trying to extend the dma-buf-map API to cover new use cases: help a
single driver with allocations and sharing code paths for IO and system
memory. I'm leaving the API additions aside and first renaming the
interface as requested.

There are already some users in tree outside the context of dma-buf
importer/exporter. So before extending the API, let's dissociate it from
dma-buf.

The iosys-map.h is introduced in the first patch in a way that allows
the conversion of each driver to happen separately. After all the
conversions are done we can remove the old one, which is the last patch.
Another possible way is to squash everything and merge together,
but I believe this would make much harder for review.

The conversion was done with the following semantic patch:

@r1@
@@
- struct dma_buf_map
+ struct iosys_map

@r2@
@@
(
- DMA_BUF_MAP_INIT_VADDR
+ IOSYS_MAP_INIT_VADDR
|
- dma_buf_map_set_vaddr
+ iosys_map_set_vaddr
|
- dma_buf_map_set_vaddr_iomem
+ iosys_map_set_vaddr_iomem
|
- dma_buf_map_is_equal
+ iosys_map_is_equal
|
- dma_buf_map_is_null
+ iosys_map_is_null
|
- dma_buf_map_is_set
+ iosys_map_is_set
|
- dma_buf_map_clear
+ iosys_map_clear
|
- dma_buf_map_memcpy_to
+ iosys_map_memcpy_to
|
- dma_buf_map_incr
+ iosys_map_incr
)

@@
@@
- #include 
+ #include 

and then some files had their includes adjusted so we can build
everything on each commit in this series. Also some comments were update
to remove mentions to dma-buf-map. Simply doing a sed to rename didn't
work as dma-buf has some APIs using the dma_buf_map prefix.

Once finalized, I think most of this, if not all, could go through the
drm-misc-next branch. I split i915, msm, nouveau, and radeon in their
own patches in case it's preferred to take those through their own
trees.

Lucas De Marchi

Lucas De Marchi (14):
  iosys-map: Introduce renamed dma-buf-map
  misc: fastrpc: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  dma-buf: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  media: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  drm/ttm: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  drm: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map in drivers
  drm/i915: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  drm/msm: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  drm/nouveau: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  drm/tegra: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  drm/radeon: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map
  drm: Replace dma-buf-map with iosys-map in common code
  Documentation: Refer to iosys-map instead of dma-buf-map
  dma-buf-map: Remove API in favor of iosys-map

 Documentation/driver-api/dma-buf.rst  |   4 +-
 Documentation/gpu/todo.rst|  20 +-
 MAINTAINERS   |   2 +-
 drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c |  22 +-
 drivers/dma-buf/heaps/cma_heap.c  |  10 +-
 drivers/dma-buf/heaps/system_heap.c   |  10 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/ast/ast_drv.h |   2 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/ast/ast_mode.c|   8 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_cache.c   |  18 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_client.c  |   9 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c   |  12 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem.c |  12 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_cma_helper.c  |   9 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_framebuffer_helper.c  |  16 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_shmem_helper.c|  15 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_ttm_helper.c  |   4 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_vram_helper.c |  25 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_internal.h|   6 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mipi_dbi.c|   8 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/drm_prime.c   |   4 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/etnaviv/etnaviv_drv.h |   2 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/etnaviv/etnaviv_gem_prime.c   |   8 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/gud/gud_pipe.c|   4 +-