Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] drm/ttm: use swap macro in ttm_bo_handle_move_mem | From | Christian König <> | Date | Fri, 13 Jul 2018 08:41:37 +0200 |
| |
Am 13.07.2018 um 04:37 schrieb Sinclair Yeh: > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 10:24:47AM -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: >> Make use of the swap macro and remove unnecessary variable *tmp_mem*. >> This makes the code easier to read and maintain. Also, reduces the >> stack usage. >> >> This code was detected with the help of Coccinelle. >> >> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c | 7 ++----- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c >> index 5d8688e52..5142dcb 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c >> @@ -287,12 +287,9 @@ static int ttm_bo_handle_move_mem(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo, >> >> if (ret) { >> if (bdev->driver->move_notify) { >> - struct ttm_mem_reg tmp_mem = *mem; >> - *mem = bo->mem; >> - bo->mem = tmp_mem; >> + swap(*mem, bo->mem); >> bdev->driver->move_notify(bo, false, mem); >> - bo->mem = *mem; >> - *mem = tmp_mem; >> + swap(*mem, bo->mem); > This code assumes bo->mem is the same as tmp_mem after the call to > move_notify. Is this always true?
Actually the old code assumed that. Using the swap macro now fixed that little unclean implementation.
Christian.
> > > >> } >> >> goto out_err; >> -- >> 2.7.4 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> dri-devel mailing list >> dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org >> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.freedesktop.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fdri-devel&data=02%7C01%7Csyeh%40vmware.com%7C3bd79878de5141b5187408d5e6326e6d%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C1%7C0%7C636668026634710967&sdata=2raJ6TBpcEM5W7hi8iCEnrEdcfJa3W5ct3tF%2BlSZLkQ%3D&reserved=0
| |