On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 02:23:37PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 28-09-18 14:38, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 09:41:52PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > > > This cleanups 2 things: > > > > > > 1) The first time we loop over the crtc-s, to compare framebuffers, fb1 > > > may > > > get set to NULL by the fb1 = CRTC_FB(crtci); statement and then we call > > > to_vbox_framebuffer() on it. The result of this call is only used for > > > an address comparison, so we don't end up dereferencing the bad pointer, > > > but still it is better to not do this. > > > > > > 2) Since we already figure out the first crtc with a fb in the first loop > > > and store that in fb1, there is no need to loop over the crtc-s again just > > > to find the first crtc with a fb again. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdego...@redhat.com> > > > > I have two patch 1/15 in this series, making it 16 patches? > > It seems like I've accidentally numbered my cover-letter > as 01/15 instead of 00/15. Could that it be that that was the problem?
Maybe, I didn't look too hard at it :) > > Something went odd on your end, can you please resend these properly? > > Done. Now applied, thanks! greg k-h _______________________________________________ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
