search for: ksz_devic

...ev *dev 623 struct usbnet *dev 561 struct mlx5_ib_dev *dev 525 struct mt76_dev *dev 465 struct mt76x02_dev *dev 435 struct platform_device *dev 431 struct usb_device *dev 411 struct mt7915_dev *dev 398 struct cx231xx *dev 378 struct mei_device *dev 363 struct ksz_device *dev 359 struct mthca_dev *dev A good portion of the above also have a dev member. Are you planning on changing all of the above too, or are you only annoyed by drm? I'm really not convinced at all. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center

...ev *dev 623 struct usbnet *dev 561 struct mlx5_ib_dev *dev 525 struct mt76_dev *dev 465 struct mt76x02_dev *dev 435 struct platform_device *dev 431 struct usb_device *dev 411 struct mt7915_dev *dev 398 struct cx231xx *dev 378 struct mei_device *dev 363 struct ksz_device *dev 359 struct mthca_dev *dev A good portion of the above also have a dev member. Are you planning on changing all of the above too, or are you only annoyed by drm? I'm really not convinced at all. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center

On Wed, 12 Jul 2023, Uwe Kleine-K?nig <u.kleine-koenig at pengutronix.de> wrote: > Hello, > > while I debugged an issue in the imx-lcdc driver I was constantly > irritated about struct drm_device pointer variables being named "dev" > because with that name I usually expect a struct device pointer. > > I think there is a big benefit when these are all renamed to

On Wed, 12 Jul 2023, Uwe Kleine-K?nig <u.kleine-koenig at pengutronix.de> wrote: > Hello, > > while I debugged an issue in the imx-lcdc driver I was constantly > irritated about struct drm_device pointer variables being named "dev" > because with that name I usually expect a struct device pointer. > > I think there is a big benefit when these are all renamed to