On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 03:52:36PM +0000, Dave Gordon wrote:
> On 11/01/16 15:04, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> >
> >On 11/01/16 14:36, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >>On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 02:08:40PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> >>>From: Tvrtko Ursulin <[email protected]>
> >>>
> >>>No need to call ktime_get_raw_ns twice per unlimited wait and can
> >>>also elimate a local variable.
> >>
> >>But we could eliminate both, and the unsightly pointless assignment only
> >>required to shut gcc up.
> >>
> >>Still preferring my patch.
> >
> >Ah I remember it now.. you were storing it in the pointer provided by
> >the caller. I think that is significantly worse, sorry cannot approve that.
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Tvrtko
> 
> Local variable good, pointer indirection through parameter bad.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Dave Gordon <[email protected]>

Needs a comment like now = 0; /* shut up dense gcc */, with that acked.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to