[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/29] drm/i915: Remove redundant parameter to i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail()

[John.C.Harrison at Intel.com]

From: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison at Intel.com>

An earlier commit (c8725f3dc0911d4354315a65150aecd8b7d0d74a: Do not call
retire_requests from wait_for_rendering) removed the use of the ring parameter
within wait_rendering__tail() but did not remove the parameter itself. As the
plan is to remove obj->ring which is where this parameter comes from, it is
simpler to just remove the parameter completely than to update it with a new
source.

For: VIZ-4377
Signed-off-by: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison at Intel.com>
CC: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
CC: Brad Volkin <bradley.d.volkin at intel.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c |    7 +++----
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
index 7e91978..c2456c2 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
@@ -1281,8 +1281,7 @@ i915_wait_seqno(struct intel_engine_cs *ring, uint32_t seqno)
 }
 
 static int
-i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
-				     struct intel_engine_cs *ring)
+i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
 {
 	if (!obj->active)
 		return 0;
@@ -1319,7 +1318,7 @@ i915_gem_object_wait_rendering(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
 	if (ret)
 		return ret;
 
-	return i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail(obj, ring);
+	return i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail(obj);
 }
 
 /* A nonblocking variant of the above wait. This is a highly dangerous routine
@@ -1359,7 +1358,7 @@ i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__nonblocking(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
 	if (ret)
 		return ret;
 
-	return i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail(obj, ring);
+	return i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail(obj);
 }
 
 /**
-- 
1.7.9.5