9 for some reason, which had the same effect as
100. Leaving it alone would have worked with a compiler warning
(999 % 256 = 231 is also >= 100, so would have the same effect),
but it seemed better to clean it up.
Signed-off-by: George Spelvin
Cc: Akinobu Mita
Cc: Jani Nikula
Cc: Joonas Laht
There's no prandom_u32_state_max, so we're using reciprocal_scale()
here directly.
(Also add a missing "const" to drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/scatterist.c)
Signed-off-by: George Spelvin
Cc: Jani Nikula
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen
Cc: Rodrigo Vivi
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedeskt
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 05:04:43PM +, Matthew Auld wrote:
> Reviewed-by: Matthew Auld
Thank you! I got some incomprehensible error emails (reproduced at
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/75090/) from the patchwork
daemon, complaining about additional test failures. Obviously, I car
2 bits of s and ms are always zero, it's a lot
simpler just to divide them by 4096, then everything fits into 32
bits, and we can easily generate a random number 1 <= s <= 0x1f.
Signed-off-by: George Spelvin
Fixes: 14d1b9a6247c
Cc: Matthew Auld
Cc: Jani Nikula
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen
