On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 05:02:36PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 04:20:51PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > @@ -640,7 +641,7 @@ static int logical_ring_wait_request(struct > > intel_ringbuffer *ringbuf, > > break; > > } > > > > - if (&request->list == &ring->request_list) > > + if (WARN_ON(&request->list == &ring->request_list)) > > return -ENOSPC; > > Checking for new_space < n (and initializing new_space to 0) would be a > clearer check imo. But that's just a bikeshed. Same for the legacy one > below.
If you watch later, I remove the double update of ringbuf->space. However, I am quite found of the if (iter == list_head) return -ENOSPC, so I am a bit biased. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
