Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   Janusz Krzysztofik <janusz.krzysztofik@linux.intel.com>
To:     Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc:     Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
        Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>,
        Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
        =?utf-8?B?TWljaGHFgg==?= Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>,
        intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] Rename functions to match their entry points
Date:   Wed, 10 Jul 2019 14:54:59 +0200
Message-ID: <34737143.LqZMGNDrZD@jkrzyszt-desk.ger.corp.intel.com>
Organization: Intel Technology Poland sp. z o.o. - ul. Slowackiego 173, 80-298 Gdansk - KRS 101882 - NIP 957-07-52-316
In-Reply-To: <156276282845.11940.4812142560907762693@skylake-alporthouse-com>
References: <20190710123631.26575-1-janusz.krzysztofik@linux.intel.com> <156276282845.11940.4812142560907762693@skylake-alporthouse-com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wednesday, July 10, 2019 2:47:08 PM CEST Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Janusz Krzysztofik (2019-07-10 13:36:25)
> > Need for this was identified while working on split of driver unbind
> > path into _remove() and _release() parts.  Consistency in function
> > naming has been recognized as helpful when trying to work out which
> > phase the code is in.
> > 
> > What I'm still not sure about is desired depth of that modification -
> > how deep should we go down with renaming to not override meaningfull
> > function names.  Please advise if you think still more deep renaming
> > makes sense.
> 
> I did a double take over "driver_release" but by the end I was in
> agreement.
> 
> The early_release though, that is worth a bit of artistic license to say
> early_probe pairs with late_release.

OK, I'll fix it, as well as other issues pointed out by dim, and resubmit.

Thanks,
Janusz

> -Chris
>