On 03/04/2019 08:13, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2019-04-03 07:44:07)
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
Mask need to be initialized to zero since device id checks may not match.
Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
Fixes: 805446c8347c ("drm/i915: Introduce concept of a sub-platform")
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jose Souza <jose.souza@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
Bots are doing a better job than me, but still
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
It's my bad, probably introduced due various refactoring of the patch
itself. Since I definitely remember changing the mask initialization
back and forth.
No huge harm done since caught quickly by this very valuable service
provided by Dan.
Regards,
Tvrtko
P.S. Also the assert about no junk in high bits did not fire in CI which
would suggest stack slot was either zero or no more than three low bits
sets. Strange luck.
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
