Re: [PATCH 1/3] drm: Balance error path for GEM handle allocation

["Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>]

On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 05:24:11PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 10:10:59AM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > The current error path for failure when establishing a handle for a GEM
> > object is unbalance, e.g. we call object_close() without calling first
> > object_open(). Use the typical onion structure to only undo what has
> > been set up prior to the error.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++------------
> >  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem.c
> > index 2e10bba4468b..a08176debc0e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem.c
> > @@ -343,27 +343,32 @@ drm_gem_handle_create_tail(struct drm_file *file_priv,
> >  	spin_unlock(&file_priv->table_lock);
> >  	idr_preload_end();
> >  	mutex_unlock(&dev->object_name_lock);
> > -	if (ret < 0) {
> > -		drm_gem_object_handle_unreference_unlocked(obj);
> > -		return ret;
> > -	}
> > +	if (ret < 0)
> > +		goto err_unref;
> > +
> >  	*handlep = ret;
> >  
> >  	ret = drm_vma_node_allow(&obj->vma_node, file_priv->filp);
> > -	if (ret) {
> > -		drm_gem_handle_delete(file_priv, *handlep);
> > -		return ret;
> > -	}
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		goto err_remove;
> >  
> >  	if (dev->driver->gem_open_object) {
> >  		ret = dev->driver->gem_open_object(obj, file_priv);
> > -		if (ret) {
> > -			drm_gem_handle_delete(file_priv, *handlep);
> > -			return ret;
> > -		}
> > +		if (ret)
> > +			goto err_revoke;
> >  	}
> >  
> >  	return 0;
> > +
> > +err_revoke:
> > +	drm_vma_node_revoke(&obj->vma_node, file_priv->filp);
> > +err_remove:
> > +	spin_lock(&file_priv->table_lock);
> > +	idr_remove(&file_priv->object_idr, *handlep);
> > +	spin_unlock(&file_priv->table_lock);
> > +err_unref:
> > +	drm_gem_object_handle_unreference_unlocked(obj);
> > +	return ret;
> 
> First I misread this as drm_gem_object_unreference_unlocked()
> and though we'd leak the handle_count++, but it's
> drm_gem_object_handle_unreference_unlocked() which does the
> handle_count-- we need.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>

BTW while looking at the code I spotted that drm_gem_handle_delete()
contains an open coded copy of drm_gem_object_release_handle(). Might
make sense to eliminate that duplication.

> 
> >  }
> >  
> >  /**
> > -- 
> > 2.6.4
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > dri-devel mailing list
> > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
> 
> -- 
> Ville Syrjälä
> Intel OTC
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx