On Thu, Oct 07, 2021 at 06:57:31PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:

On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 06:38:55PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:

quoted

There are both tegra_smmu_swgroup and tegra_smmu_group structs
using "group" for their pointer instances. This gets confusing
to read the driver sometimes.

So this patch renames "group" of struct tegra_smmu_swgroup to
"swgrp" as a cleanup. Also renames its "find" function.

Note that we already have "swgroup" being used for an unsigned
int type variable that is inside struct tegra_smmu_swgroup, so
it's not able to use "swgroup" but only something like "swgrp".

Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++-----------------
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c b/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c
index a32ed347e25d..0f3883045ffa 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/tegra-smmu.c

@@ -334,35 +334,35 @@ static void tegra_smmu_domain_free(struct iommu_domain *domain)
 }
 
 static const struct tegra_smmu_swgroup *
-tegra_smmu_find_swgroup(struct tegra_smmu *smmu, unsigned int swgroup)
+tegra_smmu_find_swgrp(struct tegra_smmu *smmu, unsigned int swgroup)

This makes things inconsistent now. The tegra_smmu_find_swgroup() name
indicates that we're looking for some "swgroup" entity within an "smmu"
object. The entity that we're looking for is a struct tegra_smmu_swgroup
so I think it makes sense to use that full name in the function name.

This is more like an indirect change to keep consistency between
function name and pointer name.

quoted

 {
-	const struct tegra_smmu_swgroup *group = NULL;
+	const struct tegra_smmu_swgroup *swgrp = NULL;

I don't think the existing naming is confusing. The variable name
"group" is consistently used for tegra_smmu_swgroup structures and there
are no cases where we would confuse them with struct tegra_smmu_group
instances.

If we don't rename it, then PATCH-4 adds to struct tegra_smmu_group
a "struct tegra_smmu_swgroup *group", which results in a confusing
group->group...

However, I don't feel strongly about it, so I'm fine with changing the
variable names to "swgrp" if you think that makes things less confusing.

Yea, I'd like to keep this change. I will respin it in next version
after fixing other comments.