On 4/9/2025 7:26 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 07:19:25PM +0530, Lazar, Lijo wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 4/9/2025 7:09 PM, Ce Sun wrote:
>>> Checking hive is more readable.
>>>
>>> The following smatch warning:
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c:6820 amdgpu_pci_slot_reset()
>>> warn: iterator used outside loop: 'tmp_adev'
>>>
>>> Fixes: 8ba904f54148 ("drm/amdgpu: Multi-GPU DPC recovery support")
>>> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpen...@linaro.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ce Sun <cesun...@amd.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c | 6 +++---
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
>>> index 60269fba5745..6fb234832ff3 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_device.c
>>> @@ -6784,8 +6784,8 @@ pci_ers_result_t amdgpu_pci_slot_reset(struct pci_dev
>>> *pdev)
>>> struct drm_device *dev = pci_get_drvdata(pdev);
>>> struct amdgpu_device *adev = drm_to_adev(dev);
>>> struct amdgpu_reset_context reset_context;
>>> - struct amdgpu_device *tmp_adev = NULL;
>>> - struct amdgpu_hive_info *hive = NULL;
>>> + struct amdgpu_device *tmp_adev;
>>> + struct amdgpu_hive_info *hive;
>>> struct list_head device_list;
>>> int r = 0, i;
>>> u32 memsize;
>>> @@ -6846,7 +6846,7 @@ pci_ers_result_t amdgpu_pci_slot_reset(struct pci_dev
>>> *pdev)
>>> dev_info(adev->dev, "PCIe error recovery succeeded\n");
>>> } else {
>>> dev_err(adev->dev, "PCIe error recovery failed, err:%d\n", r);
>>> - if (tmp_adev) {
>>> + if (hive) {
>>
>> This doesn't look correct. I think the original logic is to have a
>> single device list or multi-device list when there is a hive. Now this
>> skips the step for single device case.
>>
>
> I don't know what the original intentions were, but what I know is that
> this code will behave exactly the same as the original code.
>
Yes, this correct with respect to the new patch. But the patch which
triggered this warning actually broke the single device handling path.
Thanks,
Lijo
> regards,
> dan carpenter
>
