On 19/03/2015 15:16, Jani Nikula wrote:
On Thu, 19 Mar 2015, "Daniel, Thomas" <[email protected]> wrote:
- if (&request->list == &ring->request_list)
+ /* It should always be possible to find a suitable request! */
+ if (&request->list == &ring->request_list) {
+ WARN_ON(true);
return -ENOSPC;
+ }
Don’t we normally say
if (WARN_ON(&request->list == &ring->request_list))
return -ENOSPC;
Yes, particularly since we've amended WARN_ON within i915 to print out
the condition that failed. "true" is not very useful with that. ;)
BR,
Jani.
The issue I have with 'if(WARN_ON(x))' is that it looks like something
that would disappear in a non debugging build. Whereas, this is a check
that wants to exist regardless of build options.
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
