From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
Cc: Stanislav Lisovskiy <stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com>,
David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
Pankaj Bharadiya <pankaj.laxminarayan.bharadiya@intel.com>,
Stuart Summers <stuart.summers@intel.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx][PATCH] drm/i915/display: cleanup intel_bw_state on i915 module removal
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 20:01:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191212180108.GR1208@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191212174910.GH85422@mdroper-desk1.amr.corp.intel.com>
On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 09:49:10AM -0800, Matt Roper wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 08:09:02PM +0530, Pankaj Bharadiya wrote:
> > intel_bw_state allocated memory is not getting freed even after
> > module removal.
> >
> > kmemleak reported backtrace:
> >
> > [<0000000079019739>] kmemdup+0x17/0x40
> > [<00000000d58c1b9d>] intel_bw_duplicate_state+0x1b/0x40 [i915]
> > [<000000007423ed0c>] drm_atomic_get_private_obj_state+0xca/0x140
> > [<00000000100e3533>] intel_bw_atomic_check+0x133/0x350 [i915]
> > [<00000000126d0e0c>] intel_atomic_check+0x1ab7/0x20d0 [i915]
> > [<00000000d5dfc004>] drm_atomic_check_only+0x563/0x810
> > [<00000000c9379611>] drm_atomic_commit+0xe/0x50
> > [<00000000ec82b765>] drm_atomic_helper_disable_all+0x133/0x160
> > [<000000003c44760c>] drm_atomic_helper_shutdown+0x65/0xc0
> > [<00000000414e3e5c>] i915_driver_remove+0xcb/0x130 [i915]
> > [<00000000f8544c2a>] i915_pci_remove+0x19/0x40 [i915]
> > [<000000002dcbd148>] pci_device_remove+0x36/0xb0
> > [<000000003c8c6b0a>] device_release_driver_internal+0xe0/0x1c0
> > [<00000000580e9566>] unbind_store+0xc3/0x120
> > [<00000000869d0df5>] kernfs_fop_write+0x104/0x190
> > [<000000004dc1a355>] vfs_write+0xb9/0x1d0
> >
> > Call the drm_atomic_private_obj_fini(), which inturn calls the
> > intel_bw_destroy_state() to make sure the intel_bw_state memory is
> > freed properly.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Bharadiya <pankaj.laxminarayan.bharadiya@intel.com>
>
> It looks like we'd also leak this object if intel_modeset_init() bails
> out early due to failure to init a crtc. I.e., we call
> drm_mode_config_cleanup() which cleans up any regular state objects that
> may have been initialized by this point, but never destroy the bw_state
> which was allocated earlier in the function.
The question is why isn't the core cleaning those up for us? It already
puts them onto a list so it could easily do it. Looks like komeda has
already hand rolled exactly that.
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>
Cc: David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/display: cleanup intel_bw_state on i915 module removal
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 20:01:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191212180108.GR1208@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191212174910.GH85422@mdroper-desk1.amr.corp.intel.com>
On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 09:49:10AM -0800, Matt Roper wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 08:09:02PM +0530, Pankaj Bharadiya wrote:
> > intel_bw_state allocated memory is not getting freed even after
> > module removal.
> >
> > kmemleak reported backtrace:
> >
> > [<0000000079019739>] kmemdup+0x17/0x40
> > [<00000000d58c1b9d>] intel_bw_duplicate_state+0x1b/0x40 [i915]
> > [<000000007423ed0c>] drm_atomic_get_private_obj_state+0xca/0x140
> > [<00000000100e3533>] intel_bw_atomic_check+0x133/0x350 [i915]
> > [<00000000126d0e0c>] intel_atomic_check+0x1ab7/0x20d0 [i915]
> > [<00000000d5dfc004>] drm_atomic_check_only+0x563/0x810
> > [<00000000c9379611>] drm_atomic_commit+0xe/0x50
> > [<00000000ec82b765>] drm_atomic_helper_disable_all+0x133/0x160
> > [<000000003c44760c>] drm_atomic_helper_shutdown+0x65/0xc0
> > [<00000000414e3e5c>] i915_driver_remove+0xcb/0x130 [i915]
> > [<00000000f8544c2a>] i915_pci_remove+0x19/0x40 [i915]
> > [<000000002dcbd148>] pci_device_remove+0x36/0xb0
> > [<000000003c8c6b0a>] device_release_driver_internal+0xe0/0x1c0
> > [<00000000580e9566>] unbind_store+0xc3/0x120
> > [<00000000869d0df5>] kernfs_fop_write+0x104/0x190
> > [<000000004dc1a355>] vfs_write+0xb9/0x1d0
> >
> > Call the drm_atomic_private_obj_fini(), which inturn calls the
> > intel_bw_destroy_state() to make sure the intel_bw_state memory is
> > freed properly.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Bharadiya <pankaj.laxminarayan.bharadiya@intel.com>
>
> It looks like we'd also leak this object if intel_modeset_init() bails
> out early due to failure to init a crtc. I.e., we call
> drm_mode_config_cleanup() which cleans up any regular state objects that
> may have been initialized by this point, but never destroy the bw_state
> which was allocated earlier in the function.
The question is why isn't the core cleaning those up for us? It already
puts them onto a list so it could easily do it. Looks like komeda has
already hand rolled exactly that.
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-12 18:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-09 14:39 [Intel-gfx][PATCH] drm/i915/display: cleanup intel_bw_state on i915 module removal Pankaj Bharadiya
2019-12-09 14:39 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] " Pankaj Bharadiya
2019-12-09 20:24 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for " Patchwork
2019-12-11 5:57 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] " Lucas De Marchi
2019-12-11 5:57 ` Lucas De Marchi
2019-12-11 6:40 ` Bharadiya,Pankaj
2019-12-11 6:40 ` Bharadiya,Pankaj
2019-12-12 0:22 ` Lucas De Marchi
2019-12-12 0:22 ` Lucas De Marchi
2019-12-12 10:28 ` Bharadiya,Pankaj
2019-12-12 10:28 ` Bharadiya,Pankaj
2019-12-12 17:37 ` Matt Roper
2019-12-12 17:37 ` Matt Roper
2019-12-12 20:34 ` Lucas De Marchi
2019-12-12 20:34 ` Lucas De Marchi
2019-12-17 19:39 ` Lucas De Marchi
2019-12-17 19:39 ` Lucas De Marchi
2019-12-24 12:12 ` Shankar, Uma
2019-12-24 12:12 ` Shankar, Uma
2019-12-12 17:49 ` [Intel-gfx][PATCH] " Matt Roper
2019-12-12 17:49 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] " Matt Roper
2019-12-12 18:01 ` Ville Syrjälä [this message]
2019-12-12 18:01 ` Ville Syrjälä
2019-12-23 10:24 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2019-12-23 17:32 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
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=20191212180108.GR1208@intel.com \
--to=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
--cc=airlied@linux.ie \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=matthew.d.roper@intel.com \
--cc=pankaj.laxminarayan.bharadiya@intel.com \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=stanislav.lisovskiy@intel.com \
--cc=stuart.summers@intel.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.