Hi Emil.
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 10:48:07PM +0100, Emil Velikov wrote:
> The variables are already the exact same value or will be overwritten
> shortly afterwords. In either case there's no functional difference.
s/afterwords/afterwards/
>
> Cc: David Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_auth.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_auth.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_auth.c
> index db701a9e9393..5ae5623f2482 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_auth.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_auth.c
> @@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ drm_master_check_perm(struct drm_device *dev, struct drm_file *file_priv)
> int drm_setmaster_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> struct drm_file *file_priv)
> {
> - int ret = 0;
> + int ret;
This was the redundant asignment I mentioned in first mail - good.
>
> mutex_lock(&dev->master_mutex);
>
> @@ -282,7 +282,6 @@ int drm_dropmaster_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>
> if (file_priv->master->lessor != NULL) {
> DRM_DEBUG_LEASE("Attempt to drop lessee %d as master\n", file_priv->master->lessee_id);
> - ret = -EINVAL;
This is wrong. ret is 0 when this code is reached, so we loose the error
value if this code-path is triggered.
Or I miss something??
Sam
> goto out_unlock;
> }
>
> --
> 2.25.1
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
