On 21.09.2017 12:03, Eric Engestrom wrote:
Hmm, just noticed the title should be fixed. Something like this?
amd/addrlib: drop unnecessary va_copy()
Makes sense, but I already pushed it...
On Wednesday, 2017-09-20 14:48:46 +, Nicolai Hähnle wrote:
From: Nicolai Hähnle
There's no re
Hmm, just noticed the title should be fixed. Something like this?
> amd/addrlib: drop unnecessary va_copy()
On Wednesday, 2017-09-20 14:48:46 +, Nicolai Hähnle wrote:
> From: Nicolai Hähnle
>
> There's no reason to use va_copy here.
>
> CID: 1418113
> ---
> I have a slight preference for t
Reviewed-by: Marek Olšák
M.
On Sep 20, 2017 7:48 AM, "Nicolai Hähnle" wrote:
> From: Nicolai Hähnle
>
> There's no reason to use va_copy here.
>
> CID: 1418113
> ---
> I have a slight preference for this variant.
> --
> src/amd/addrlib/core/addrobject.cpp | 8 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 in
On Wednesday, 2017-09-20 14:48:46 +, Nicolai Hähnle wrote:
> From: Nicolai Hähnle
>
> There's no reason to use va_copy here.
You're right, I didn't think about the code, I just checked that
coverity wasn't wrong and went with its proposal, but this whole code
is indeed unnecessary, so:
Revi
From: Nicolai Hähnle
There's no reason to use va_copy here.
CID: 1418113
---
I have a slight preference for this variant.
--
src/amd/addrlib/core/addrobject.cpp | 8 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/amd/addrlib/core/addrobject.cpp
b/src/amd/addrlib/cor
