[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915/guc: Clean up of register capture search

[Teres Alexis, Alan Previn]

I see you are inferring that a guc-id of zero can be valid.
I am guessing that might have contributed to some lost captures?
Thanks for catching this.

Reviewed-by: Alan Previn <alan.previn.teres.alexis at intel.com>

On Thu, 2023-02-02 at 17:10 -0800, John.C.Harrison at Intel.com wrote:
> From: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison at Intel.com>
> 
> The comparison in the search for a matching register capture node was
> not the most readable. So remove two redundant terms and re-format to
> keep each term on a single line, and only one term per line.
> 
> Signed-off-by: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison at Intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_capture.c | 5 ++---
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_capture.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_capture.c
> index 710999d7189ee..87b080dd6bead 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_capture.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_capture.c
> @@ -1627,9 +1627,8 @@ void intel_guc_capture_get_matching_node(struct intel_gt *gt,
>         list_for_each_entry_safe(n, ntmp, &guc->capture->outlist, link) {
>                 if (n->eng_inst == GUC_ID_TO_ENGINE_INSTANCE(ee->engine->guc_id) &&
>                     n->eng_class == GUC_ID_TO_ENGINE_CLASS(ee->engine->guc_id) &&
> -                   n->guc_id && n->guc_id == ce->guc_id.id &&
> -                   (n->lrca & CTX_GTT_ADDRESS_MASK) && (n->lrca & CTX_GTT_ADDRESS_MASK) ==
> -                   (ce->lrc.lrca & CTX_GTT_ADDRESS_MASK)) {
> +                   n->guc_id == ce->guc_id.id &&
> +                   (n->lrca & CTX_GTT_ADDRESS_MASK) == (ce->lrc.lrca & CTX_GTT_ADDRESS_MASK)) {
>                         list_del(&n->link);
>                         ee->guc_capture_node = n;
>                         ee->guc_capture = guc->capture;