Re: [PATCH drm-misc-next v7 4/7] drm/gpuvm: add an abstraction for a VM / BO combination

[Danilo Krummrich <dakr@redhat.com>]

On 10/31/23 17:50, Thomas Hellström wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-10-31 at 17:30 +0100, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
>> On 10/31/23 12:45, Jani Nikula wrote:
>>> On Tue, 31 Oct 2023, Thomas Hellström
>>> <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 2023-10-23 at 22:16 +0200, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
>>>>> + * Returns: a pointer to the &drm_gpuvm_bo on success, NULL on
>>>>
>>>> Still needs s/Returns:/Return:/g
>>>
>>> FWIW, both work to accommodate the variance across the kernel,
>>> although
>>> I think only the latter is documented and recommended. It's also
>>> the
>>> most popular:
>>>
>>>     10577 Return
>>>      3596 Returns
>>
>> I'd like to keep "Returns", since that's what GPUVM uses already
>> everywhere else.
> 
> Ok. It looks like the Returns: are converted to Return in the rendered
> output so I guess that's why it's the form that is documented.
> 
> I pointed this out since in the last review you replied you were going
> to change it, and also when the code starts seeing updates from other,
> it might become inconsistent if those patches follow the documented
> way.

Sorry for that. I think I wrote this answer when I was at XDC and hence was
a little bit distracted.

> 
> But I'm OK either way.

Ok, then let's just keep it as it is.

> 
> /Thomas
> 
> 
>>
>>>      1104 RETURN
>>>       568 return
>>>       367 returns
>>>       352 RETURNS
>>>         1 RETURNs
>>>
>>> BR,
>>> Jani.
>>>
>>>
>>
>