From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> To: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com> Cc: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>, llvm@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/xe: Fix warning on impossible condition Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2024 09:07:36 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20240103160736.GA3837497@dev-arch.thelio-3990X> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20231218163301.3453285-1-lucas.demarchi@intel.com> On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 08:33:01AM -0800, Lucas De Marchi wrote: > Having a different value for op is not possible: this is already kept > out of user-visible warning by the check in xe_wait_user_fence_ioctl() > if op > MAX_OP. The warning is useful as if this switch() is not update > when a new op is added, it should be triggered. > > Fix warning as reported by 0-DAY CI Kernel: > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_wait_user_fence.c:46:2: warning: variable 'passed' is used uninitialized whenever switch default is taken [-Wsometimes-uninitialized] > > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202312170357.KPSinwPs-lkp@intel.com/ > Fixes: dd08ebf6c352 ("drm/xe: Introduce a new DRM driver for Intel GPUs") > Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> I am now seeing this warning in -next, can this be applied as a fix so that our builds are not broken? > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_wait_user_fence.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_wait_user_fence.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_wait_user_fence.c > index b0a7896f7fcb..a75eeba7bfe5 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_wait_user_fence.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_wait_user_fence.c > @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ static int do_compare(u64 addr, u64 value, u64 mask, u16 op) > break; > default: > XE_WARN_ON("Not possible"); > + return -EINVAL; > } > > return passed ? 0 : 1; > -- > 2.40.1 >
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> To: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com> Cc: llvm@lists.linux.dev, intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/xe: Fix warning on impossible condition Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2024 09:07:36 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20240103160736.GA3837497@dev-arch.thelio-3990X> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20231218163301.3453285-1-lucas.demarchi@intel.com> On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 08:33:01AM -0800, Lucas De Marchi wrote: > Having a different value for op is not possible: this is already kept > out of user-visible warning by the check in xe_wait_user_fence_ioctl() > if op > MAX_OP. The warning is useful as if this switch() is not update > when a new op is added, it should be triggered. > > Fix warning as reported by 0-DAY CI Kernel: > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_wait_user_fence.c:46:2: warning: variable 'passed' is used uninitialized whenever switch default is taken [-Wsometimes-uninitialized] > > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202312170357.KPSinwPs-lkp@intel.com/ > Fixes: dd08ebf6c352 ("drm/xe: Introduce a new DRM driver for Intel GPUs") > Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> I am now seeing this warning in -next, can this be applied as a fix so that our builds are not broken? > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_wait_user_fence.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_wait_user_fence.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_wait_user_fence.c > index b0a7896f7fcb..a75eeba7bfe5 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_wait_user_fence.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_wait_user_fence.c > @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ static int do_compare(u64 addr, u64 value, u64 mask, u16 op) > break; > default: > XE_WARN_ON("Not possible"); > + return -EINVAL; > } > > return passed ? 0 : 1; > -- > 2.40.1 >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-03 16:07 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2023-12-18 16:33 [PATCH] drm/xe: Fix warning on impossible condition Lucas De Marchi 2023-12-18 16:39 ` Rodrigo Vivi 2023-12-18 21:14 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for " Patchwork 2023-12-18 21:14 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork 2023-12-18 21:15 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork 2023-12-18 21:23 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork 2023-12-18 21:23 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork 2023-12-18 21:25 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork 2023-12-18 21:59 ` ✓ CI.BAT: " Patchwork 2024-01-03 16:07 ` Nathan Chancellor [this message] 2024-01-03 16:07 ` [PATCH] " Nathan Chancellor 2024-01-04 5:51 ` Lucas De Marchi 2024-01-04 5:51 ` Lucas De Marchi
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20240103160736.GA3837497@dev-arch.thelio-3990X \ --to=nathan@kernel.org \ --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \ --cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \ --cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \ --cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.