Nouveau - Jan 2025 - [PATCH] drm/sched: Use struct for drm_sched_init() params

On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 10:35:43AM +0100, Philipp Stanner
wrote:
> On Thu, 2025-01-23 at 10:29 +0100, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 08:33:01AM +0100, Philipp Stanner wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2025-01-22 at 18:16 +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 15:08:20 +0100
> > > > Philipp Stanner <phasta at kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > ?int drm_sched_init(struct drm_gpu_scheduler *sched,
> > > > > - ?? const struct drm_sched_backend_ops *ops,
> > > > > - ?? struct workqueue_struct *submit_wq,
> > > > > - ?? u32 num_rqs, u32 credit_limit, unsigned int
hang_limit,
> > > > > - ?? long timeout, struct workqueue_struct *timeout_wq,
> > > > > - ?? atomic_t *score, const char *name, struct device
*dev);
> > > > > + const struct drm_sched_init_params *params);
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Another nit: indenting is messed up here.
> > > 
> > > That was done on purpose.
> > 
> > Let's not change this convention, it's used all over the
kernel tree,
> > including
> > the GPU scheduler. People are used to read code that is formatted
> > this way, plus
> > the attempt of changing it will make code formatting inconsistent.
> 
> Both the tree and this file are already inconsistent in regards to
> this.
That's not really a good argument to make it more inconsistent, is it?
> 
> Anyways, what is your proposed solution to ridiculous nonsense like
> this?
> 
>
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.13-rc3/source/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c#L1296
I don't think this one needs a solution.

The kernel picked a convention long ago, which also has downsides. If it gets
too bad, we can deviate from conventions at any point of time; for the thing
that otherwise would be bad, but we shouldn't do it in general.