On Fri, Mar 27, 2026 at 11:29:23AM +0800, Chen Ni wrote:
> Using a ',' in place of a ';' can have unintended side effects.
> Although that is not the case here, it seems best to use ';'
> unless ',' is intended.
> 
> Found by inspection.
> No functional change intended.
> Compile tested only.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chen Ni <[email protected]>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
> index d96e0a0c5605..21844217dccd 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
> @@ -626,9 +626,9 @@ void xe_vm_add_fault_entry_pf(struct xe_vm *vm, struct 
> xe_pagefault *pf)
>       e->address_precision = SZ_4K;
>       e->access_type = pf->consumer.access_type;
>       e->fault_type = FIELD_GET(XE_PAGEFAULT_TYPE_MASK,
> -                               pf->consumer.fault_type_level),
> +                               pf->consumer.fault_type_level);
>       e->fault_level = FIELD_GET(XE_PAGEFAULT_LEVEL_MASK,
> -                                pf->consumer.fault_type_level),
> +                                pf->consumer.fault_type_level);

This code is not present in our tree.

In the xe_pagefault.c where this FIELD_GET commands are actually implemented,
the comma is the right way.


>  
>       list_add_tail(&e->list, &vm->faults.list);
>       vm->faults.len++;
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 

Reply via email to