On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 12:07:44PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Apr 2020, Colin Ian King wrote:
> > Hi Dan,
> >
> > I'd post a revert, but I don't seem to see an upstream commit for this
> > this to revert against. What's the revert policy in these cases? Or can
> > the patch be just ign
On Tue, 14 Apr 2020, Colin Ian King wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
> I'd post a revert, but I don't seem to see an upstream commit for this
> this to revert against. What's the revert policy in these cases? Or can
> the patch be just ignored by the maintainers so it's not applied?
It has not been applied, an
Hi Dan,
I'd post a revert, but I don't seem to see an upstream commit for this
this to revert against. What's the revert policy in these cases? Or can
the patch be just ignored by the maintainers so it's not applied?
Colin
On 14/04/2020 10:23, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> Hi Colin,
>
> url:
> ht
Hi Colin,
url:
https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Colin-King/drm-i915-gt-remove-redundant-assignment-to-variable-x/20200411-032731
base: git://anongit.freedesktop.org/drm-intel for-linux-next
If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
Reported-by: kbuild test robot
From: Colin Ian King
The variable x is being initialized with a value that is never read
and it is being updated later with a new value. The initialization is
redundant and can be removed.
Addresses-Coverity: ("Unused value")
Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_eng
