Quoting Vinicius Tinti (2021-01-30 12:34:11) > On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 08:55:54PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Vinicius Tinti (2021-01-29 18:15:19) > > > By enabling -Wunreachable-code-aggressive on Clang the following code > > > paths are unreachable. > > > > That code exists as commentary and, especially for sdvo, library > > functions that we may need in future. > > I would argue that this code could be removed since it is in git history. > It can be restored when needed. > > This will make the code cleaner. It doesn't change the control flow, so no complexity argument. It removes documentation from the code, so I have the opposite opinion. > > The ivb-gt1 case => as we now set the gt level for ivb, should we not > > enable the optimisation for ivb unaffected by the w/a? Just no one has > > taken the time to see if it causes a regression. > > I don't know. I just found out that the code is unreachable. > > > For error state, the question remains whether we should revert to > > uncompressed data if the compressed stream is larger than the original. > > I don't know too. > > In this last two cases the code could be commented and the decisions > and problems explained in the comment section. They already are, that is the point. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
