Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 1 Jan 2020 19:48:43 +0100
From:   Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To:     Wambui Karuga <wambui.karugax@gmail.com>
Cc:     bskeggs@redhat.com, airlied@linux.ie, daniel@ffwll.ch,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/nouveau: remove set but unused variable.
Message-ID: <20200101184843.GA3856@dvetter-linux.ger.corp.intel.com>
Mail-Followup-To: Wambui Karuga <wambui.karugax@gmail.com>,
        bskeggs@redhat.com, airlied@linux.ie,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20191231205607.1005-1-wambui.karugax@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20191231205607.1005-1-wambui.karugax@gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 11:56:07PM +0300, Wambui Karuga wrote:
> The local variable `pclks` is defined and set but not used and can
> therefore be removed.
> Issue found by coccinelle.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wambui Karuga <wambui.karugax@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv04/arb.c | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv04/arb.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv04/arb.c
> index 362495535e69..f607a04d262d 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv04/arb.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/dispnv04/arb.c
> @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ static void
>  nv04_calc_arb(struct nv_fifo_info *fifo, struct nv_sim_state *arb)
>  {
>  	int pagemiss, cas, width, bpp;
> -	int nvclks, mclks, pclks, crtpagemiss;
> +	int nvclks, mclks, crtpagemiss;

Hm, reading the code (just from how stuff is named) I wonder whether the
original idea was that the calculation for us_p should us pclks, not
nvclks, but given that this code is as old as the initial nouveau merge
probably not a good idea to touch it. Plus I guess not many with a vintage
nv04 in working condition around to even test stuff ...

Ben, what should we do here?
-Daniel

>  	int found, mclk_extra, mclk_loop, cbs, m1, p1;
>  	int mclk_freq, pclk_freq, nvclk_freq;
>  	int us_m, us_n, us_p, crtc_drain_rate;
> @@ -69,7 +69,6 @@ nv04_calc_arb(struct nv_fifo_info *fifo, struct nv_sim_state *arb)
>  	bpp = arb->bpp;
>  	cbs = 128;
>  
> -	pclks = 2;
>  	nvclks = 10;
>  	mclks = 13 + cas;
>  	mclk_extra = 3;
> -- 
> 2.17.1
> 

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch