[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: initialize ret in i915_gem_evict_something

[Matthew Auld]

On 5 January 2017 at 15:13, Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 02:41:31PM +0000, Matthew Auld wrote:
>> If we find a suitable victim node on our first pass, then ret
>> will be uninitialized which could lead to some funny business later.
>>
>> Fixes: 9332f3b1b99a ("drm/i915: Combine loops within i915_gem_evict_something")
>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
>> Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld at intel.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_evict.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_evict.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_evict.c
>> index 50129ec1caab..19716548c455 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_evict.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_evict.c
>> @@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ i915_gem_evict_something(struct i915_address_space *vm,
>>       }, **phase;
>>       struct i915_vma *vma, *next;
>>       struct drm_mm_node *node;
>> -     int ret;
>> +     int ret = 0;
>
> Please don't randomly initialise locals. It is meant to be initialised
> just prior to the unbind loop. It appears that my patches are
> out-of-order. :|
Oh, then I misread the intention of the code, sorry.