| Message ID | 20180215162816.22066-1-harry.wentland@amd.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Hi Harry, On 15 February 2018 at 16:28, Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@amd.com> wrote: > This threw me for a loop when I read the docs. I imagine this is the > intended definition: > http://www.dictionary.com/browse/nerf Yeah. I'm quite sure it was intended to be 'nerfed', but replacing it with something more clear (and especially more accessible to non-native speakers) would be great if you could do that instead please. :) Cheers, Daniel
On 2018-02-15 11:40 AM, Daniel Stone wrote: > Hi Harry, > > On 15 February 2018 at 16:28, Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@amd.com> wrote: >> This threw me for a loop when I read the docs. I imagine this is the >> intended definition: >> http://www.dictionary.com/browse/nerf > > Yeah. I'm quite sure it was intended to be 'nerfed', but replacing it > with something more clear (and especially more accessible to > non-native speakers) would be great if you could do that instead > please. :) Good point. danvet, I'm not sure exactly what nerfed really means in this context? Does it mean 'dropped', 'deprecated', 'no longer supported'? I also see a reference to drm version 1.4 but I only see version 1.3 in libdrm? Harry > > Cheers, > Daniel >
On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@amd.com> wrote: > On 2018-02-15 11:40 AM, Daniel Stone wrote: >> Hi Harry, >> >> On 15 February 2018 at 16:28, Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@amd.com> wrote: >>> This threw me for a loop when I read the docs. I imagine this is the >>> intended definition: >>> http://www.dictionary.com/browse/nerf >> >> Yeah. I'm quite sure it was intended to be 'nerfed', but replacing it >> with something more clear (and especially more accessible to >> non-native speakers) would be great if you could do that instead >> please. :) > > Good point. > > danvet, I'm not sure exactly what nerfed really means in this context? Does it mean 'dropped', 'deprecated', 'no longer supported'? > I think in this context, it means broken. Alex > I also see a reference to drm version 1.4 but I only see version 1.3 in libdrm? > > Harry > >> >> Cheers, >> Daniel >> > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 03:33:17PM -0500, Alex Deucher wrote: > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@amd.com> wrote: > > On 2018-02-15 11:40 AM, Daniel Stone wrote: > >> Hi Harry, > >> > >> On 15 February 2018 at 16:28, Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@amd.com> wrote: > >>> This threw me for a loop when I read the docs. I imagine this is the > >>> intended definition: > >>> http://www.dictionary.com/browse/nerf > >> > >> Yeah. I'm quite sure it was intended to be 'nerfed', but replacing it > >> with something more clear (and especially more accessible to > >> non-native speakers) would be great if you could do that instead > >> please. :) > > > > Good point. > > > > danvet, I'm not sure exactly what nerfed really means in this context? Does it mean 'dropped', 'deprecated', 'no longer supported'? > > > > I think in this context, it means broken. For slang, urban dictionary helps: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nerf i.e. I meant "removed to make it harmless". So dropped/no longer supported is accurate I think. And 'deprecated' for the intent to remove it in the future. -Daniel > > Alex > > > I also see a reference to drm version 1.4 but I only see version 1.3 in libdrm? > > > > Harry > > > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Daniel > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > dri-devel mailing list > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
On 2018-02-19 10:27 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 03:33:17PM -0500, Alex Deucher wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@amd.com> wrote: >>> On 2018-02-15 11:40 AM, Daniel Stone wrote: >>>> Hi Harry, >>>> >>>> On 15 February 2018 at 16:28, Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@amd.com> wrote: >>>>> This threw me for a loop when I read the docs. I imagine this is the >>>>> intended definition: >>>>> http://www.dictionary.com/browse/nerf >>>> >>>> Yeah. I'm quite sure it was intended to be 'nerfed', but replacing it >>>> with something more clear (and especially more accessible to >>>> non-native speakers) would be great if you could do that instead >>>> please. :) >>> >>> Good point. >>> >>> danvet, I'm not sure exactly what nerfed really means in this context? Does it mean 'dropped', 'deprecated', 'no longer supported'? >>> >> >> I think in this context, it means broken. > > For slang, urban dictionary helps: > > https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nerf I was tempted to post the urban dictionary link but wasn't sure how well it would go over in a kernel commit. :) > > i.e. I meant "removed to make it harmless". So dropped/no longer supported > is accurate I think. And 'deprecated' for the intent to remove it in the > future. Thanks for clarifying. Harry > -Daniel > >> >> Alex >> >>> I also see a reference to drm version 1.4 but I only see version 1.3 in libdrm? >>> >>> Harry >>> >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Daniel >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> dri-devel mailing list >>> dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org >>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel >
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_ioctl.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_ioctl.c index 4aafe4802099..82b7ce6c99c2 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_ioctl.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_ioctl.c @@ -51,15 +51,15 @@ * - GET_UNIQUE ioctl, implemented by drm_getunique is wrapped up in libdrm * through the drmGetBusid function. * - The libdrm drmSetBusid function is backed by the SET_UNIQUE ioctl. All - * that code is nerved in the kernel with drm_invalid_op(). + * that code is nerfed in the kernel with drm_invalid_op(). * - The internal set_busid kernel functions and driver callbacks are * exclusively use by the SET_VERSION ioctl, because only drm 1.0 (which is - * nerved) allowed userspace to set the busid through the above ioctl. + * nerfed) allowed userspace to set the busid through the above ioctl. * - Other ioctls and functions involved are named consistently. * * For anyone wondering what's the difference between drm 1.1 and 1.4: Correctly * handling pci domains in the busid on ppc. Doing this correctly was only - * implemented in libdrm in 2010, hence can't be nerved yet. No one knows what's + * implemented in libdrm in 2010, hence can't be nerfed yet. No one knows what's * special with drm 1.2 and 1.3. * * Now the actual horror story of how device lookup in drm works. At large,
This threw me for a loop when I read the docs. I imagine this is the intended definition: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/nerf Signed-off-by: Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@amd.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/drm_ioctl.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)