Hi, Dave, I'm sorry I missed this one.

(but the warning is shut up with another patch).

I agree this code is ugly, (and has become even uglier). I'll put on my todo list to find a way to do this more cleanly...

/Thomas

On 11/08/2013 07:13 AM, Dave Airlie wrote:

From: Dave Airlie airlied@redhat.com

Though I'm not really happy with how ugly this code is now.

Signed-off-by: Dave Airlie airlied@redhat.com

drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_drv.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_drv.c index 0b5c781..ba1f8f1 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_drv.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_drv.c @@ -482,7 +482,9 @@ static int vmw_dma_select_mode(struct vmw_private *dev_priv) dev_priv->map_mode = vmw_dma_map_populate; #endif

+#ifdef CONFIG_INTEL_IOMMU out_fixup: +#endif if (dev_priv->map_mode == vmw_dma_map_populate && vmw_restrict_iommu) dev_priv->map_mode = vmw_dma_map_bind;