Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756069AbaLHQSe (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2014 11:18:34 -0500 Received: from mail-oi0-f49.google.com ([209.85.218.49]:60602 "EHLO mail-oi0-f49.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756031AbaLHQSb (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2014 11:18:31 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20141208141750.GR20350@phenom.ffwll.local> References: <1417976957-15049-1-git-send-email-rickard_strandqvist@spectrumdigital.se> <20141208084228.GI20350@phenom.ffwll.local> <20141208141750.GR20350@phenom.ffwll.local> Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2014 14:18:30 -0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] gpu: drm: i915: intel_display.c: Remove unused function From: Paulo Zanoni To: Paulo Zanoni , Rickard Strandqvist , Daniel Vetter , Jani Nikula , Intel Graphics Development , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , DRI Development , Damien Lespiau Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 2014-12-08 12:17 GMT-02:00 Daniel Vetter : > On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 10:32:49AM -0200, Paulo Zanoni wrote: >> 2014-12-08 6:42 GMT-02:00 Daniel Vetter : >> > On Sun, Dec 07, 2014 at 07:29:17PM +0100, Rickard Strandqvist wrote: >> >> Remove the function intel_output_name() that is not used anywhere. >> >> >> >> This was partially found by using a static code analysis program called cppcheck. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist >> > >> > Queued for 3.20, thanks for the patch. >> >> This function was created for the "DDI personality" patches. We merged >> the function but never ended up merging the patch containing the >> callers... > > Oops, I've thought this is a renmant from the very first days of kms that > somehow stuck around. That's what I get for once not using git blame > excessively :( Want me to drop the patch again? I am not opposed to the removal of an unused function: I understand the value in the removal, and I also understand the reasons to keep it. I was just pointing the reason of why we got here: we merged patch 1/2 but ended up never merging patch 2/2 because we always spot some additional work required and it's a very low priority bug. If this function is removed, the next person to try to ressurrect the ddi personality patch can quickly resurrect it or even write a new implementation from scratch. It is your decision :) > -Daniel > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch -- Paulo Zanoni -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/