Hi Chris,
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/intel_memory_region.c
> > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/intel_memory_region.c
> > > index 75839db63bea..59c58a276677 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/intel_memory_region.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/intel_memory_region.c
> > > @@ -852,6 +852,9 @@ static int _perf_memcpy(struct intel_memory_region
> > > *src_mr,
> > > }
> > >
> > > sort(t, ARRAY_SIZE(t), sizeof(*t), wrap_ktime_compare,
> > > NULL);
> > > + if (!t[0])
> > > + continue;
> > > +
> >
> > are you assuming here that if t[0] is '0', also the rest of 't'
> > is '0'?
>
> It's sorted into ascending order with ktime_t... Hmm, s64 not u64 as I
> presumed. So better to check <= 0.
by division by 0 I guess you mean here:
div64_u64(mul_u32_u32(4 * size,
1000 * 1000 * 1000),
t[1] + 2 * t[2] + t[3]) >> 20);
why are you testing t[0]? Did I miss anything else?
Andi
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
