Re: [PATCH] staging: sm750fb: rename 'proc_setBLANK'

[Greg KH]

On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 11:15:55PM +0900, Kisub Choe wrote:
> Rename 'proc_setBLANK' to 'proc_setBLANK' to

That doesn't rename anything :(



> conform with kernel style guidelines as reported by checkpatch.pl
> 
> CHECK: Avoid CamelCase: <proc_setBLANK>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kisub Choe <kisub.choe.0x1@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c | 4 ++--
>  drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.h | 2 +-
>  2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c
> index 1d929aca399c..bb2ade6030c2 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/sm750.c
> @@ -577,7 +577,7 @@ static int lynxfb_ops_blank(int blank, struct fb_info *info)
>  	pr_debug("blank = %d.\n", blank);
>  	par = info->par;
>  	output = &par->output;
> -	return output->proc_setBLANK(output, blank);
> +	return output->proc_set_blank(output, blank);
>  }
>  
>  static int sm750fb_set_drv(struct lynxfb_par *par)
> @@ -605,7 +605,7 @@ static int sm750fb_set_drv(struct lynxfb_par *par)
>  	crtc->ypanstep = 1;
>  	crtc->ywrapstep = 0;
>  
> -	output->proc_setBLANK = (sm750_dev->revid == SM750LE_REVISION_ID) ?
> +	output->proc_set_blank = (sm750_dev->revid == SM750LE_REVISION_ID) ?
>  				 hw_sm750le_set_blank : hw_sm750_set_blank;

Why do we even need this function pointer?  Why not just do the check
above when it is called instead of this indirection?

thanks,

greg k-h