Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 20 Jul 2023 12:07:36 +0200
From:   Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>
To:     Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
Cc:     suijingfeng <suijingfeng@loongson.cn>,
        David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
        Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
        Emma Anholt <emma@anholt.net>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [05/11] drm/tests: helpers: Create an helper to allocate a
 locking ctx
Message-ID: <5khgq6xy4ztci45qtxzo7fyvmdj3i6rrnl5yuny3gusgeeumdq@eobkes722rky>
References: <20230710-kms-kunit-actions-rework-v1-5-722c58d72c72@kernel.org>
 <970f4a65-25dc-1805-3776-6447a61f77c5@loongson.cn>
 <87o7k7hg1d.fsf@minerva.mail-host-address-is-not-set>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="p3xg2ps427f43xcp"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87o7k7hg1d.fsf@minerva.mail-host-address-is-not-set>
Precedence: bulk


--p3xg2ps427f43xcp
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 09:12:14PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> suijingfeng <suijingfeng@loongson.cn> writes:
>=20
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2023/7/10 15:47, Maxime Ripard wrote:
>=20
> [...]
>=20
> >> +
> >> +/**
> >> + * drm_kunit_helper_context_alloc - Allocates an acquire context
> >> + * @test: The test context object
> >> + *
> >> + * Allocates and initializes a modeset acquire context.
> >> + *
> >> + * The context is tied to the kunit test context, so we must not call
> >> + * drm_modeset_acquire_fini() on it, it will be done so automatically.
> >> + *
> >> + * Returns:
> >> + * An ERR_PTR on error, a pointer to the newly allocated context othe=
rwise
> >> + */
> >> +struct drm_modeset_acquire_ctx *
> >> +drm_kunit_helper_acquire_ctx_alloc(struct kunit *test)
> >> +{
> >> +	struct drm_modeset_acquire_ctx *ctx;
> >> +	int ret;
> >> +
> >> +	ctx =3D kunit_kzalloc(test, sizeof(*ctx), GFP_KERNEL);
> >> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test, ctx);
> >> +
> >> +	drm_modeset_acquire_init(ctx, 0);
> >> +
> >> +	ret =3D kunit_add_action_or_reset(test,
> >> +					action_drm_release_context,
> >> +					ctx);
> >> +	if (ret)
> >> +		return ERR_PTR(ret);
> >> +
> >> +	return ctx;
> >> +}
> >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(drm_kunit_helper_acquire_ctx_alloc);
> >> +
> >
> > I think all of the patch inside this series are quite well.
> >
> > Personally, I can't find problems in it.
> >
> >
> > But I still want to ask a question:
> >
> > Should the managed functions you introduced be prefixed with drmm_=20
> > (instead of drm_) ?
> >
>=20
> That's a good question. But personally I think that the drmm_ prefix
> should be reserved for drm_device managed resources and helpers.

Yeah, to me drmm functions are meant for resources that are tied to the
DRM device lifetime. These resources are tied to the test lifetime, so
they shouldn't share the same prefix.

> > As mindless programmer may still want to call drm_modeset_acquire_fini(=
)=20
> > on the pointer returned by
> >
> > drm_kunit_helper_acquire_ctx_alloc()?
> >
>=20
> The function kernel-doc already mentions that there's no need to do that
> and that will be done automatically by kunit. So shouldn't be different of
> other functions helper where the programmer didn't read the documentation.

Right

Maxime

--p3xg2ps427f43xcp
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEABYKAB0WIQRcEzekXsqa64kGDp7j7w1vZxhRxQUCZLkHaAAKCRDj7w1vZxhR
xToyAP4hkRI/8aKpOKams5XwxbGYROu5Qb2VT8DyZViYoQZlhAEAky8Oe4eJS3dM
4NDsW3WmKERxiFbfmvNxib5fvgiE9AU=
=7/bm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--p3xg2ps427f43xcp--