On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 10:12:12PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: > I just noticed in our code we don't really check the assertion, and > given some of the code I am changing in this area, I feel a WARN is very > nice to have. > > Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > index 498ef8a..b91a7f0 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > @@ -3186,6 +3186,8 @@ search_free: > if (i915_is_ggtt(vm)) > obj->map_and_fenceable = mappable && fenceable; > > + WARN_ON(map_and_fenceable & !obj->map_and_fenceable); s/&/&&/ I think, although since both are bools it doesn't matter correctness-wise. -Daniel > + > trace_i915_vma_bind(vma, map_and_fenceable); > i915_gem_verify_gtt(dev); > return 0; > -- > 1.8.3.4 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
