Re: [PATCH v3] drm: move allocation out of drm_get_format_name()

From: Eric Engestrom <eric.engestrom@imgtec.com>
To: Eric Engestrom <eric@engestrom.ch>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	Wei Yongjun <yongjun_wei@trendmicro.com.cn>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>,
	Flora Cui <Flora.Cui@amd.com>,
	Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@collabora.co.uk>,
	Tom St Denis <tom.stdenis@amd.com>,
	Chunming Zhou <David1.Zhou@amd.com>,
	Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@vmware.com>,
	Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com>,
	Sinclair Yeh <syeh@vmware.com>,
	Xinliang Liu <z.liuxinliang@hisilicon.com>,
	Xinwei Kong <kong.kongxinwei@hisilicon.com>,
	VMware Graphics <linux-graphics-maintainer@vmware.com>,
	Vitaly Prosyak <vitaly.prosyak@amd.com>,
	Alexandre Demers <alexandre.f.demers@gmail.com>,
	Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Emily Deng <Emily.Deng@amd.com>,
	Colin Ian King <colin.king@ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] drm: move allocation out of drm_get_format_name()
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 11:42:17 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161109114217.GO25290@imgtec.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161109011325.hvvfsvpq734nduxd@phenom.ffwll.local>

On Wednesday, 2016-11-09 02:13:25 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 02:09:16AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 12:17:52AM +0000, Eric Engestrom wrote:
> > > The function's behaviour was changed in 90844f00049e, without changing
> > > its signature, causing people to keep using it the old way without
> > > realising they were now leaking memory.
> > > Rob Clark also noticed it was also allocating GFP_KERNEL memory in
> > > atomic contexts, breaking them.
> > > 
> > > Instead of having to allocate GFP_ATOMIC memory and fixing the callers
> > > to make them cleanup the memory afterwards, let's change the function's
> > > signature by having the caller take care of the memory and passing it to
> > > the function.
> > > The new parameter is a single-field struct in order to enforce the size
> > > of its buffer and help callers to correctly manage their memory.
> > > 
> > > Fixes: 90844f00049e ("drm: make drm_get_format_name thread-safe")
> > > Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>
> > > Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
> > > Acked-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
> > > Acked-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>
> > > Acked-by: Sinclair Yeh <syeh@vmware.com> (vmwgfx)
> > > Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
> > > Suggested-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom <eric@engestrom.ch>
> > > ---
> > > v3 - fix "Fixes" tag, replace it with an actual commit message
> > >    - collect ack & r-b
> > > 
> > > v2 - use single-field struct instead of typedef to let the compiler
> > >      enforce the type (Christian König)
> > 
> > Applied to drm-misc, thanks.
> 
> Well, had to drop it again since it didn't compile:
> 
> 
>   CC [M]  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_blend.o
> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c: In function ‘drm_atomic_plane_print_state’:
> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c:920:5: error: too few arguments to function ‘drm_get_format_name’
>      drm_get_format_name(fb->pixel_format));
>      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> In file included from ./include/drm/drmP.h:71:0,
>                  from drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic.c:29:
> ./include/drm/drm_fourcc.h:65:7: note: declared here
>  char *drm_get_format_name(uint32_t format, struct drm_format_name_buf *buf);
>        ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> Can you pls rebase onto drm-misc or linux-next or something?

That was based on airlied/drm-next (last fetched on Sunday I think),
I can rebase it on drm-misc if it helps, but it seems older than
drm-next.
Should I just rebase on top of current head of drm-next?
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx