On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 12:02 PM, SF Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 17:54:32 +0200 > > The drm_property_unreference_blob() function tests whether its argument > is NULL and then returns immediately. > Thus the test around the call is not needed. > > This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software. > > Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c | 3 +-- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c > index 3cee084..8d2f111 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c > @@ -404,8 +404,7 @@ drm_atomic_replace_property_blob(struct drm_property_blob **blob, > if (old_blob == new_blob) > return; > > - if (old_blob) > - drm_property_unreference_blob(old_blob); > + drm_property_unreference_blob(old_blob); > if (new_blob) > drm_property_reference_blob(new_blob); I wonder whether it'd be worthwhile to add the same check to drm_property_reference_blob to make things symmetric. Musings aside, I've applied this to drm-misc. Sean > *blob = new_blob; > -- > 2.9.2 > > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
