On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 11:56:07PM +0300, Wambui Karuga wrote:
> The local variable `pclks` is defined and set but not used and can
> therefore be removed.
> Issue found by coccinelle.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wambui Karuga <wambui.karugax@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv04/arb.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv04/arb.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv04/arb.c
> index 362495535e69..f607a04d262d 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv04/arb.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv04/arb.c
> @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ static void
> nv04_calc_arb(struct nv_fifo_info *fifo, struct nv_sim_state *arb)
> {
> int pagemiss, cas, width, bpp;
> - int nvclks, mclks, pclks, crtpagemiss;
> + int nvclks, mclks, crtpagemiss;
Hm, reading the code (just from how stuff is named) I wonder whether the
original idea was that the calculation for us_p should us pclks, not
nvclks, but given that this code is as old as the initial nouveau merge
probably not a good idea to touch it. Plus I guess not many with a vintage
nv04 in working condition around to even test stuff ...
Ben, what should we do here?
-Daniel
> int found, mclk_extra, mclk_loop, cbs, m1, p1;
> int mclk_freq, pclk_freq, nvclk_freq;
> int us_m, us_n, us_p, crtc_drain_rate;
> @@ -69,7 +69,6 @@ nv04_calc_arb(struct nv_fifo_info *fifo, struct nv_sim_state *arb)
> bpp = arb->bpp;
> cbs = 128;
>
> - pclks = 2;
> nvclks = 10;
> mclks = 13 + cas;
> mclk_extra = 3;
> --
> 2.17.1
>
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Nouveau mailing list
Nouveau@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nouveau
