From: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
To: David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>
Cc: Luca Barbieri <luca@luca-barbieri.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Subject: [patch] i915: take struct_mutex lock in intel_setup_overlay()
Date: Sat, 1 May 2010 00:27:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100430222757.GJ29093@bicker> (raw)
This is more of RFC than a proper patch.
I was looking at https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15673 and I
wrote a script to show where we call drm_gem_object_unreference()
without holding struct_mutex and it showed these two places.
There call tree to here is:
i915_load_modeset_init()
=> intel_modeset_init()
=> intel_setup_overlay()
"reg_bo" is a local variable so we could probably leave that as
drm_gem_object_unreference() although I changed it in this patch.
The i915_gem_object_pin() function calls i915_gem_object_bind_to_gtt()
where we start unreferencing stuff if we're low on space. So possibly
that lock is needed. The call tree is:
i915_gem_object_pin()
=> i915_gem_object_bind_to_gtt()
=> i915_gem_evict_something()
=> i915_gem_retire_requests()
=> i915_gem_retire_request()
=> drm_gem_object_unreference()
On the other hand, this is all in the module init so it seems like
locking shouldn't be necessary, and certainly I can't see how it would
cause the suspend bug.
I don't have this hardware btw, so I can't actually test this patch.
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_overlay.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_overlay.c
index 6d524a1..a103582 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_overlay.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_overlay.c
@@ -1347,7 +1347,9 @@ void intel_setup_overlay(struct drm_device *dev)
overlay->reg_bo = to_intel_bo(reg_bo);
if (OVERLAY_NONPHYSICAL(dev)) {
+ mutex_lock(&dev->struct_mutex);
ret = i915_gem_object_pin(reg_bo, PAGE_SIZE);
+ mutex_unlock(&dev->struct_mutex);
if (ret) {
DRM_ERROR("failed to pin overlay register bo\n");
goto out_free_bo;
@@ -1385,7 +1387,7 @@ void intel_setup_overlay(struct drm_device *dev)
return;
out_free_bo:
- drm_gem_object_unreference(reg_bo);
+ drm_gem_object_unreference_unlocked(reg_bo);
out_free:
kfree(overlay);
return;
next reply other threads:[~2010-04-30 22:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-30 22:27 Dan Carpenter [this message]
2010-05-03 7:58 ` [patch v2] i915: take struct_mutex lock in intel_setup_overlay() Dan Carpenter
2010-06-19 13:39 ` Dan Carpenter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100430222757.GJ29093@bicker \
--to=error27@gmail.com \
--cc=airlied@linux.ie \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=luca@luca-barbieri.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.