[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170825170945.156639-1-mka@chromium.org>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2017 10:09:45 -0700
From: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>
Cc: intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...el.com>,
Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers@...il.com>,
Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>
Subject: [PATCH] drm/i915: Mark wait_for_engine() as maybe_unused
The only call of wait_for_engine() is wrapped in a GEM_WARN_ON macro,
which confusingly suppresses the call unless CONFIG_DRM_I915_DEBUG_GEM
is set.
According to http://www.spinics.net/lists/intel-gfx/msg128768.html the
current behavior is correct, even though it's not obvious. Different
solutions to improve GEM_WARN_ON were discussed, but no conclusion
was reached.
Mark wait_for_engine() as maybe_unused to avoid a compiler warning,
according to the above discussion this is still needed evein if
GEM_WARN_ON is eventually refactored.
Reported-by: Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
index 969bac8404f1..52d0b7d0082b 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
@@ -3364,7 +3364,8 @@ static int wait_for_timeline(struct i915_gem_timeline *tl, unsigned int flags)
return 0;
}
-static int wait_for_engine(struct intel_engine_cs *engine, int timeout_ms)
+static __maybe_unused int wait_for_engine(
+ struct intel_engine_cs *engine, int timeout_ms)
{
return wait_for(intel_engine_is_idle(engine), timeout_ms);
}
--
2.14.1.342.g6490525c54-goog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists