Re: [PATCH] drm/mm: Don't WARN if drm_mm_reserve_node

[Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>]

On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 07:25:37AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 10:21:44AM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > I am not convinced this is the correct solution. At least the way we
> > used this interface, it isn't meant to ever fail.  I also didn't look
> > into exactly why we depend an ENOSPC return. That sounds fragile to me,
> > especially for a public interface.
> 
> Eh? This interface is explicitly used to check that the requested range
> is available.
> -Chris
> 

What I mean is, the node is already initialized, and we always expect it
to be available - at least with all the callers prior to the fastboot.

I didn't look very closely at how we get the fb objects from the
existing stolen memory, but my drive-by review would suggest it's much
better to deal with the redundancy at that level (or make this an i915
private function).

Removing the WARN is fine with me though, it's:
Tested-by: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>

My complaint was more with how we solved the problem initially, and not
with this patch itself.

-- 
Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center