[PATCH] GPU-DRM-TTM: Delete an unnecessary check before the function call "ttm_tt_destroy"
From: Markus Elfring elfring@users.sourceforge.net Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 15:40:58 +0100
The ttm_tt_destroy() function tests whether its argument is NULL and then returns immediately. Thus the test around the call is not needed.
This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring elfring@users.sourceforge.net --- drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c | 3 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c index 745e996..d6736e6 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c @@ -147,8 +147,7 @@ static void ttm_bo_release_list(struct kref *list_kref) BUG_ON(!list_empty(&bo->lru)); BUG_ON(!list_empty(&bo->ddestroy));
- if (bo->ttm) - ttm_tt_destroy(bo->ttm); + ttm_tt_destroy(bo->ttm); atomic_dec(&bo->glob->bo_count); if (bo->resv == &bo->ttm_resv) reservation_object_fini(&bo->ttm_resv);
From: Markus Elfring elfring@users.sourceforge.net Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 20:20:48 +0200
The ttm_tt_destroy() function tests whether its argument is NULL and then returns immediately. Thus the test around the call is not needed.
Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring elfring@users.sourceforge.net --- drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c | 4 +--- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c index 39386f5..23809d0 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c @@ -146,9 +146,7 @@ static void ttm_bo_release_list(struct kref *list_kref) BUG_ON(bo->mem.mm_node != NULL); BUG_ON(!list_empty(&bo->lru)); BUG_ON(!list_empty(&bo->ddestroy)); - - if (bo->ttm) - ttm_tt_destroy(bo->ttm); + tm_tt_destroy(bo->ttm); atomic_dec(&bo->glob->bo_count); if (bo->resv == &bo->ttm_resv) reservation_object_fini(&bo->ttm_resv);
On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 08:28:18PM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
From: Markus Elfring elfring@users.sourceforge.net Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 20:20:48 +0200
The ttm_tt_destroy() function tests whether its argument is NULL and then returns immediately. Thus the test around the call is not needed.
Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring elfring@users.sourceforge.net
drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c | 4 +--- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c index 39386f5..23809d0 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c @@ -146,9 +146,7 @@ static void ttm_bo_release_list(struct kref *list_kref) BUG_ON(bo->mem.mm_node != NULL); BUG_ON(!list_empty(&bo->lru)); BUG_ON(!list_empty(&bo->ddestroy));
- if (bo->ttm)
ttm_tt_destroy(bo->ttm);
- tm_tt_destroy(bo->ttm);
This doesn't compile. Tsk, pls be more careful, and definitely compile-test _all_ your changes before hitting send. I've dropped this one from my queue, the others still look ok. -Daniel
atomic_dec(&bo->glob->bo_count); if (bo->resv == &bo->ttm_resv) reservation_object_fini(&bo->ttm_resv); -- 2.9.1
dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
From: Markus Elfring elfring@users.sourceforge.net Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 16:06:18 +0200
The ttm_tt_destroy() function tests whether its argument is NULL and then returns immediately. Thus the test around the call is not needed.
This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring elfring@users.sourceforge.net --- drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c | 4 +--- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c index 39386f5..4e55863 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c @@ -146,9 +146,7 @@ static void ttm_bo_release_list(struct kref *list_kref) BUG_ON(bo->mem.mm_node != NULL); BUG_ON(!list_empty(&bo->lru)); BUG_ON(!list_empty(&bo->ddestroy)); - - if (bo->ttm) - ttm_tt_destroy(bo->ttm); + ttm_tt_destroy(bo->ttm); atomic_dec(&bo->glob->bo_count); if (bo->resv == &bo->ttm_resv) reservation_object_fini(&bo->ttm_resv);
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 04:10:36PM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
From: Markus Elfring elfring@users.sourceforge.net Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 16:06:18 +0200
The ttm_tt_destroy() function tests whether its argument is NULL and then returns immediately. Thus the test around the call is not needed.
This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring elfring@users.sourceforge.net
When resending pls describe what changed (and why). Also I'd still like that smatch included in the commit message. -Daniel
drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c | 4 +--- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c index 39386f5..4e55863 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c @@ -146,9 +146,7 @@ static void ttm_bo_release_list(struct kref *list_kref) BUG_ON(bo->mem.mm_node != NULL); BUG_ON(!list_empty(&bo->lru)); BUG_ON(!list_empty(&bo->ddestroy));
- if (bo->ttm)
ttm_tt_destroy(bo->ttm);
- ttm_tt_destroy(bo->ttm); atomic_dec(&bo->glob->bo_count); if (bo->resv == &bo->ttm_resv) reservation_object_fini(&bo->ttm_resv);
-- 2.9.2
When resending pls describe what changed (and why).
v3: A bit of reformatting with current software
v2: Broken patch where I managed to delete a "t" too much in a source code line somehow.
v1: See also a similar update suggestion https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/11/16/416
Would you like to pick such a software adjustment up?
Regards, Markus
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 4:45 PM, Daniel Vetter daniel@ffwll.ch wrote:
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 04:10:36PM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
From: Markus Elfring elfring@users.sourceforge.net Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 16:06:18 +0200
The ttm_tt_destroy() function tests whether its argument is NULL and then returns immediately. Thus the test around the call is not needed.
This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring elfring@users.sourceforge.net
When resending pls describe what changed (and why). Also I'd still like that smatch included in the commit message.
A similar change was made in drm-next, causing a merge conflict between the drm-next and drm-misc trees.
commit 4279cb1423d96e53b6b98ae9f2b41003b013a31f Author: Christian König christian.koenig@amd.com Date: Mon Jun 6 10:17:51 2016 +0200
drm/ttm: remove NULL checks when calling ttm_tt_destroy
The function is a no-op with a NULL pointer.
Reviewed-by: Alex Deucher alexander.deucher@amd.com Signed-off-by: Christian König christian.koenig@amd.com Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher alexander.deucher@amd.com
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 10:14:07AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 4:45 PM, Daniel Vetter daniel@ffwll.ch wrote:
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 04:10:36PM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
From: Markus Elfring elfring@users.sourceforge.net Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 16:06:18 +0200
The ttm_tt_destroy() function tests whether its argument is NULL and then returns immediately. Thus the test around the call is not needed.
This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring elfring@users.sourceforge.net
When resending pls describe what changed (and why). Also I'd still like that smatch included in the commit message.
A similar change was made in drm-next, causing a merge conflict between the drm-next and drm-misc trees.
commit 4279cb1423d96e53b6b98ae9f2b41003b013a31f Author: Christian König christian.koenig@amd.com Date: Mon Jun 6 10:17:51 2016 +0200
drm/ttm: remove NULL checks when calling ttm_tt_destroy The function is a no-op with a NULL pointer. Reviewed-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com> Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>
Yeah, realized that too but then drm-misc is a non-rebasing tree now, so can't take this out. -Daniel
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
-
Daniel Vetter -
Geert Uytterhoeven -
SF Markus Elfring