[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aac9a178-e58c-60c7-a9b5-56ce219d051c@amd.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2022 13:32:39 -0400
From: Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@....com>
To: Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@...il.com>
Cc: Haowen Bai <baihaowen@...zu.com>, Leo Li <sunpeng.li@....com>,
Rodrigo Siqueira <Rodrigo.Siqueira@....com>,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
"Pan, Xinhui" <Xinhui.Pan@....com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
amd-gfx list <amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Maling list - DRI developers
<dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/display: Fix indenting mistakes in
dcn10_hw_sequencer.c
On 2022-04-07 12:07, Alex Deucher wrote:
> Actually this just causes another warning. Dropped for now. More below.
>
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 11:52 AM Alex Deucher <alexdeucher@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> Applied. Thanks!
>>
>> Alex
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 10:18 AM Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@....com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2022-04-07 02:00, Haowen Bai wrote:
>>>> Smatch reports the following:
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../display/dc/dcn10/dcn10_hw_sequencer.c:2174
>>>> dcn10_enable_vblanks_synchronization() warn: if statement not indented
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Haowen Bai <baihaowen@...zu.com>
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Harry Wentland <harry.wentland@....com>
>>>
>>> Harry
>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dcn10/dcn10_hw_sequencer.c | 14 +++++++-------
>>>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dcn10/dcn10_hw_sequencer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dcn10/dcn10_hw_sequencer.c
>>>> index ee22f4422d26..3c338b85040c 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dcn10/dcn10_hw_sequencer.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/dc/dcn10/dcn10_hw_sequencer.c
>>>> @@ -2172,13 +2172,13 @@ void dcn10_enable_vblanks_synchronization(
>>>> if (master >= 0) {
>>>> for (i = 0; i < group_size; i++) {
>>>> if (i != master && !grouped_pipes[i]->stream->has_non_synchronizable_pclk)
>>>> - grouped_pipes[i]->stream_res.tg->funcs->align_vblanks(
>>>> - grouped_pipes[master]->stream_res.tg,
>>>> - grouped_pipes[i]->stream_res.tg,
>>>> - grouped_pipes[master]->stream->timing.pix_clk_100hz,
>>>> - grouped_pipes[i]->stream->timing.pix_clk_100hz,
>>>> - get_clock_divider(grouped_pipes[master], false),
>>>> - get_clock_divider(grouped_pipes[i], false));
>>>> + grouped_pipes[i]->stream_res.tg->funcs->align_vblanks(
>>>> + grouped_pipes[master]->stream_res.tg,
>>>> + grouped_pipes[i]->stream_res.tg,
>>>> + grouped_pipes[master]->stream->timing.pix_clk_100hz,
>>>> + grouped_pipes[i]->stream->timing.pix_clk_100hz,
>>>> + get_clock_divider(grouped_pipes[master], false),
>>>> + get_clock_divider(grouped_pipes[i], false));
>>>> grouped_pipes[i]->stream->vblank_synchronized = true;
>
> @Harry Wentland should this last statement be part of the if clause or
> the for loop?
>
It should be part of the if clause.
Harry
> Alex
>
>>>> }
>>>> grouped_pipes[master]->stream->vblank_synchronized = true;
>>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists