[PATCH] drm/amdgpu: Replace tmp_adev with hive in amdgpu_pci_slot_reset

Dan Carpenter dan.carpenter at linaro.org
Wed Apr 9 13:56:46 UTC 2025


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.carpenter at linaro.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Ce Sun <cesun102 at 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.

regards,
dan carpenter



More information about the amd-gfx mailing list