On Sat, 30 May 2020 at 08:48, Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> 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??
>
A few lines above [1] - there's unconditional ret = -EINVAL. Although
the set<>drop paths are pretty asymmetric and misleading.
Let me respin the series.
-Emil
[1] https://cgit.freedesktop.org/drm/drm-misc/tree/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_auth.c?id=6015002ece38dac85a373f041e0302781de7474b#n293
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
