Re: [PATCH -next 0/8] drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 04:02:18PM +0200, Christian König wrote: > Am 16.09.20 um 15:36 schrieb Alex Deucher: > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 3:51 AM Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 09:38:34AM +0200, Christian König wrote: > > > > Am 15.09.20 um 21:35 schrieb Ville Syrjälä: > > > > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 03:16:32PM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: > > > > > > I question the value of these warnings. Why even have a boolean > > > > > > type > > > > > > if you are going to get warnings when you use them... > > > > > > That said, applied to avoid getting these patches again and again > > > > > > every time someone sees this. > > > > > if (this_is_sparta) > > > > > if (this_is_sparta == true) > > > > > if (this_is_sparta != false) > > > > > > > > > > I think the first one reads the best, and avoids having to > > > > > decide between truth and falsehood :) > > > > +1 > > > +1, especially because we also have the inversion when using negative > > > errno codes for failures and 0 as success, which results in > > > > > > if (errno == 0) /* success case */ > > > > > > but > > > if (bool == 0) /* failure case */ > > > > > > now creative people do sometimes > > > > > > if (!errno) /* success case */ > > > > > > which I think is horribly confusing. So imo for more easier telling apart > > > of these too I think consistently using the short form for booleans, and > > > consistently using the more explicit long form for errno checks is a Very > > > Good Pattern :-) > > I don't disagree with your logic, but we regularly get patches to > > convert errno checks to drop the direct comparison because that is the > > "preferred kernel style". Arguably, we should be explicit in all > > cases as that avoids all confusion. With that in mind, my original > > point stands. Why have a type when comparisons against valid settings > > for that type produce errors? Oh, I didn't know that this happens for errno too. I withdraw my +1 and concur this is a bikeshed. I guess still applying to shut up the patch stream is the most reasonable thing :-/ -Daniel > Well it isn't an error, but raising a nice warning is most likely a good > idea. > > Christian. > > > > > Alex > > > > > Cheers, Daniel > > > > > > > Christian. > > > > > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 9:21 AM Christian König > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Acked-by: Christian König for the > > > > > > > series. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Am 09.09.20 um 15:07 schrieb Zheng Bin: > > > > > > > > Zheng Bin (8): > > > > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > > > > gfx_v9_0.c > > > > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > > > > gfx_v10_0.c > > > > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > > > > sdma_v5_0.c > > > > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > > > > sdma_v5_2.c > > > > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > > > > si.c > > > > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > > > > uvd_v6_0.c > > > > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > > > >amdgpu_atpx_handler.c > > > > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > > > > sdma_v4_0.c > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_atpx_handler.c | 4 ++-- > > > > > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c | 2 +- > > > > > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c| 2 +- > > > > > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v4_0.c | 4 ++-- > > > > > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v5_0.c | 2 +- > > > > > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v5_2.c | 2 +- > > > > > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/si.c | 2 +- > > > > > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/uvd_v6_0.c| 4 ++-- > > > > > > > > 8 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > 2.26.0.106.g9fadedd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > > > > > amd-gfx mailing list > > > > > > > amd-...@lists.freedesktop.org > > > > > > > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.freedesktop.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Famd-gfxdata=02%7C01%7Cchristian.koenig%40amd.com%7Cdc7a8d7517d341e3a80c08d85a458ba8%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637358602051676053sdata=MS0vcBcU7unXjEFlbd8kLbJkJ4sKcvIdLjc8yhX4UUI%3Dreserved=0 > > > > > > ___ > > > > > > dri-devel mailing list > > > > > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > > > > >
Re: [PATCH -next 0/8] drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning
Am 16.09.20 um 15:36 schrieb Alex Deucher: On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 3:51 AM Daniel Vetter wrote: On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 09:38:34AM +0200, Christian König wrote: Am 15.09.20 um 21:35 schrieb Ville Syrjälä: On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 03:16:32PM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: I question the value of these warnings. Why even have a boolean type if you are going to get warnings when you use them... That said, applied to avoid getting these patches again and again every time someone sees this. if (this_is_sparta) if (this_is_sparta == true) if (this_is_sparta != false) I think the first one reads the best, and avoids having to decide between truth and falsehood :) +1 +1, especially because we also have the inversion when using negative errno codes for failures and 0 as success, which results in if (errno == 0) /* success case */ but if (bool == 0) /* failure case */ now creative people do sometimes if (!errno) /* success case */ which I think is horribly confusing. So imo for more easier telling apart of these too I think consistently using the short form for booleans, and consistently using the more explicit long form for errno checks is a Very Good Pattern :-) I don't disagree with your logic, but we regularly get patches to convert errno checks to drop the direct comparison because that is the "preferred kernel style". Arguably, we should be explicit in all cases as that avoids all confusion. With that in mind, my original point stands. Why have a type when comparisons against valid settings for that type produce errors? Well it isn't an error, but raising a nice warning is most likely a good idea. Christian. Alex Cheers, Daniel Christian. Alex On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 9:21 AM Christian König wrote: Acked-by: Christian König for the series. Am 09.09.20 um 15:07 schrieb Zheng Bin: Zheng Bin (8): drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in gfx_v9_0.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in gfx_v10_0.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in sdma_v5_0.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in sdma_v5_2.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in si.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in uvd_v6_0.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in amdgpu_atpx_handler.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in sdma_v4_0.c drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_atpx_handler.c | 4 ++-- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c| 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v4_0.c | 4 ++-- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v5_0.c | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v5_2.c | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/si.c | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/uvd_v6_0.c| 4 ++-- 8 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) -- 2.26.0.106.g9fadedd ___ amd-gfx mailing list amd-...@lists.freedesktop.org https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.freedesktop.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Famd-gfxdata=02%7C01%7Cchristian.koenig%40amd.com%7Cdc7a8d7517d341e3a80c08d85a458ba8%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637358602051676053sdata=MS0vcBcU7unXjEFlbd8kLbJkJ4sKcvIdLjc8yhX4UUI%3Dreserved=0 ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.freedesktop.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fdri-develdata=02%7C01%7Cchristian.koenig%40amd.com%7Cdc7a8d7517d341e3a80c08d85a458ba8%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637358602051686051sdata=MgfR%2BwCVY9gWfhQ9i5kWcKiiYkV1C8O2dEKlZYSqscE%3Dreserved=0 ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.freedesktop.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fdri-develdata=02%7C01%7Cchristian.koenig%40amd.com%7Cdc7a8d7517d341e3a80c08d85a458ba8%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637358602051686051sdata=MgfR%2BwCVY9gWfhQ9i5kWcKiiYkV1C8O2dEKlZYSqscE%3Dreserved=0 -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.ffwll.ch%2Fdata=02%7C01%7Cchristian.koenig%40amd.com%7Cdc7a8d7517d341e3a80c08d85a458ba8%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637358602051686051sdata=GvLs5OXw2Ny%2BieJxm8hjawNb0rGA966539iAwlWwPMY%3Dreserved=0 ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [PATCH -next 0/8] drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 3:51 AM Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 09:38:34AM +0200, Christian König wrote: > > Am 15.09.20 um 21:35 schrieb Ville Syrjälä: > > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 03:16:32PM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: > > > > I question the value of these warnings. Why even have a boolean type > > > > if you are going to get warnings when you use them... > > > > That said, applied to avoid getting these patches again and again > > > > every time someone sees this. > > > if (this_is_sparta) > > > if (this_is_sparta == true) > > > if (this_is_sparta != false) > > > > > > I think the first one reads the best, and avoids having to > > > decide between truth and falsehood :) > > > > +1 > > +1, especially because we also have the inversion when using negative > errno codes for failures and 0 as success, which results in > > if (errno == 0) /* success case */ > > but > if (bool == 0) /* failure case */ > > now creative people do sometimes > > if (!errno) /* success case */ > > which I think is horribly confusing. So imo for more easier telling apart > of these too I think consistently using the short form for booleans, and > consistently using the more explicit long form for errno checks is a Very > Good Pattern :-) I don't disagree with your logic, but we regularly get patches to convert errno checks to drop the direct comparison because that is the "preferred kernel style". Arguably, we should be explicit in all cases as that avoids all confusion. With that in mind, my original point stands. Why have a type when comparisons against valid settings for that type produce errors? Alex > > Cheers, Daniel > > > > > Christian. > > > > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 9:21 AM Christian König > > > > wrote: > > > > > Acked-by: Christian König for the series. > > > > > > > > > > Am 09.09.20 um 15:07 schrieb Zheng Bin: > > > > > > Zheng Bin (8): > > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > > gfx_v9_0.c > > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > > gfx_v10_0.c > > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > > sdma_v5_0.c > > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > > sdma_v5_2.c > > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in si.c > > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > > uvd_v6_0.c > > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > > amdgpu_atpx_handler.c > > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > > sdma_v4_0.c > > > > > > > > > > > >drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_atpx_handler.c | 4 ++-- > > > > > >drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c | 2 +- > > > > > >drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c| 2 +- > > > > > >drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v4_0.c | 4 ++-- > > > > > >drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v5_0.c | 2 +- > > > > > >drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v5_2.c | 2 +- > > > > > >drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/si.c | 2 +- > > > > > >drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/uvd_v6_0.c| 4 ++-- > > > > > >8 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > 2.26.0.106.g9fadedd > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > > > amd-gfx mailing list > > > > > amd-...@lists.freedesktop.org > > > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx > > > > ___ > > > > dri-devel mailing list > > > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel > > > > ___ > > dri-devel mailing list > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel > > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > http://blog.ffwll.ch ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [PATCH -next 0/8] drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 09:38:34AM +0200, Christian König wrote: > Am 15.09.20 um 21:35 schrieb Ville Syrjälä: > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 03:16:32PM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: > > > I question the value of these warnings. Why even have a boolean type > > > if you are going to get warnings when you use them... > > > That said, applied to avoid getting these patches again and again > > > every time someone sees this. > > if (this_is_sparta) > > if (this_is_sparta == true) > > if (this_is_sparta != false) > > > > I think the first one reads the best, and avoids having to > > decide between truth and falsehood :) > > +1 +1, especially because we also have the inversion when using negative errno codes for failures and 0 as success, which results in if (errno == 0) /* success case */ but if (bool == 0) /* failure case */ now creative people do sometimes if (!errno) /* success case */ which I think is horribly confusing. So imo for more easier telling apart of these too I think consistently using the short form for booleans, and consistently using the more explicit long form for errno checks is a Very Good Pattern :-) Cheers, Daniel > > Christian. > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 9:21 AM Christian König > > > wrote: > > > > Acked-by: Christian König for the series. > > > > > > > > Am 09.09.20 um 15:07 schrieb Zheng Bin: > > > > > Zheng Bin (8): > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > gfx_v9_0.c > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > gfx_v10_0.c > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > sdma_v5_0.c > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > sdma_v5_2.c > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in si.c > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > uvd_v6_0.c > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > amdgpu_atpx_handler.c > > > > > drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > > > sdma_v4_0.c > > > > > > > > > >drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_atpx_handler.c | 4 ++-- > > > > >drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c | 2 +- > > > > >drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c| 2 +- > > > > >drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v4_0.c | 4 ++-- > > > > >drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v5_0.c | 2 +- > > > > >drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v5_2.c | 2 +- > > > > >drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/si.c | 2 +- > > > > >drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/uvd_v6_0.c| 4 ++-- > > > > >8 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > 2.26.0.106.g9fadedd > > > > > > > > > ___ > > > > amd-gfx mailing list > > > > amd-...@lists.freedesktop.org > > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx > > > ___ > > > dri-devel mailing list > > > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel > > ___ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [PATCH -next 0/8] drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning
Am 15.09.20 um 21:35 schrieb Ville Syrjälä: On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 03:16:32PM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: I question the value of these warnings. Why even have a boolean type if you are going to get warnings when you use them... That said, applied to avoid getting these patches again and again every time someone sees this. if (this_is_sparta) if (this_is_sparta == true) if (this_is_sparta != false) I think the first one reads the best, and avoids having to decide between truth and falsehood :) +1 Christian. Alex On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 9:21 AM Christian König wrote: Acked-by: Christian König for the series. Am 09.09.20 um 15:07 schrieb Zheng Bin: Zheng Bin (8): drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in gfx_v9_0.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in gfx_v10_0.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in sdma_v5_0.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in sdma_v5_2.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in si.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in uvd_v6_0.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in amdgpu_atpx_handler.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in sdma_v4_0.c drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_atpx_handler.c | 4 ++-- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c| 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v4_0.c | 4 ++-- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v5_0.c | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v5_2.c | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/si.c | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/uvd_v6_0.c| 4 ++-- 8 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) -- 2.26.0.106.g9fadedd ___ amd-gfx mailing list amd-...@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [PATCH -next 0/8] drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning
On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 03:16:32PM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: > I question the value of these warnings. Why even have a boolean type > if you are going to get warnings when you use them... > That said, applied to avoid getting these patches again and again > every time someone sees this. if (this_is_sparta) if (this_is_sparta == true) if (this_is_sparta != false) I think the first one reads the best, and avoids having to decide between truth and falsehood :) > > Alex > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 9:21 AM Christian König > wrote: > > > > Acked-by: Christian König for the series. > > > > Am 09.09.20 um 15:07 schrieb Zheng Bin: > > > Zheng Bin (8): > > >drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in gfx_v9_0.c > > >drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in gfx_v10_0.c > > >drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in sdma_v5_0.c > > >drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in sdma_v5_2.c > > >drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in si.c > > >drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in uvd_v6_0.c > > >drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > > amdgpu_atpx_handler.c > > >drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in sdma_v4_0.c > > > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_atpx_handler.c | 4 ++-- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c | 2 +- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c| 2 +- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v4_0.c | 4 ++-- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v5_0.c | 2 +- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v5_2.c | 2 +- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/si.c | 2 +- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/uvd_v6_0.c| 4 ++-- > > > 8 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > > > > > -- > > > 2.26.0.106.g9fadedd > > > > > > > ___ > > amd-gfx mailing list > > amd-...@lists.freedesktop.org > > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx > ___ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel -- Ville Syrjälä Intel ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [PATCH -next 0/8] drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning
I question the value of these warnings. Why even have a boolean type if you are going to get warnings when you use them... That said, applied to avoid getting these patches again and again every time someone sees this. Alex On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 9:21 AM Christian König wrote: > > Acked-by: Christian König for the series. > > Am 09.09.20 um 15:07 schrieb Zheng Bin: > > Zheng Bin (8): > >drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in gfx_v9_0.c > >drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in gfx_v10_0.c > >drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in sdma_v5_0.c > >drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in sdma_v5_2.c > >drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in si.c > >drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in uvd_v6_0.c > >drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in > > amdgpu_atpx_handler.c > >drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in sdma_v4_0.c > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_atpx_handler.c | 4 ++-- > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c | 2 +- > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c| 2 +- > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v4_0.c | 4 ++-- > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v5_0.c | 2 +- > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v5_2.c | 2 +- > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/si.c | 2 +- > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/uvd_v6_0.c| 4 ++-- > > 8 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > > > -- > > 2.26.0.106.g9fadedd > > > > ___ > amd-gfx mailing list > amd-...@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
[PATCH -next 0/8] drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning
Zheng Bin (8): drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in gfx_v9_0.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in gfx_v10_0.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in sdma_v5_0.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in sdma_v5_2.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in si.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in uvd_v6_0.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in amdgpu_atpx_handler.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in sdma_v4_0.c drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_atpx_handler.c | 4 ++-- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c| 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v4_0.c | 4 ++-- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v5_0.c | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v5_2.c | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/si.c | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/uvd_v6_0.c| 4 ++-- 8 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) -- 2.26.0.106.g9fadedd ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
Re: [PATCH -next 0/8] drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning
Acked-by: Christian König for the series. Am 09.09.20 um 15:07 schrieb Zheng Bin: Zheng Bin (8): drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in gfx_v9_0.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in gfx_v10_0.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in sdma_v5_0.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in sdma_v5_2.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in si.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in uvd_v6_0.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in amdgpu_atpx_handler.c drm/amd/amdgpu: fix comparison pointer to bool warning in sdma_v4_0.c drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_atpx_handler.c | 4 ++-- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v10_0.c | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c| 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v4_0.c | 4 ++-- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v5_0.c | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/sdma_v5_2.c | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/si.c | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/uvd_v6_0.c| 4 ++-- 8 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) -- 2.26.0.106.g9fadedd ___ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
