From: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@vmware.com>,
stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/core: Do not preserve framebuffer on rmfb.
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 12:24:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56F12B50.6030903@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160322110924.GX28483@phenom.ffwll.local>
Op 22-03-16 om 12:09 schreef Daniel Vetter:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:53:53AM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> Op 22-03-16 om 11:50 schreef Daniel Vetter:
>>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:32:32AM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>>>> Op 21-03-16 om 18:37 schreef Daniel Vetter:
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 03:11:17PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>>>>>> It turns out that preserving framebuffers after the rmfb call breaks
>>>>>> vmwgfx userspace. This was originally introduced because it was thought
>>>>>> nobody relied on the behavior, but unfortunately it seems there are
>>>>>> exceptions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> drm_framebuffer_remove may fail with -EINTR now, so a straight revert
>>>>>> is impossible. There is no way to remove the framebuffer from the lists
>>>>>> and active planes without introducing a race because of the different
>>>>>> locking requirements. Instead call drm_framebuffer_remove from a
>>>>>> workqueue, which is unaffected by signals.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org #v4.4+
>>>>>> Fixes: 13803132818c ("drm/core: Preserve the framebuffer after removing it.")
>>>>>> Testcase: kms_flip.flip-vs-rmfb-interruptible
>>>>>> References: https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2016-March/102876.html
>>>>>> Cc: Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@vmware.com>
>>>>>> Cc: David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@gmail.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_crtc.c | 20 +++++++++++++++++++-
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_crtc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_crtc.c
>>>>>> index e08f962288d9..b7d0b959f088 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_crtc.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_crtc.c
>>>>>> @@ -3434,6 +3434,18 @@ int drm_mode_addfb2(struct drm_device *dev,
>>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +struct drm_mode_rmfb_work {
>>>>>> + struct work_struct work;
>>>>>> + struct drm_framebuffer *fb;
>>>>>> +};
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static void drm_mode_rmfb_work_fn(struct work_struct *w)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct drm_mode_rmfb_work *arg = container_of(w, typeof(*arg), work);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + drm_framebuffer_remove(arg->fb);
>>>>> drm_framebuffer_remove still has the problem of not working correctly with
>>>>> atomic since atomic commit will complain if we try to do more than 1
>>>>> commit per ww_acquire_ctx. I think we still need an atomic version of
>>>>> this. Also probably a more nasty igt testcase which uses the same fb on
>>>>> more than one plane to be able to hit this case.
>>>> That's true, but a separate bug. :)
>>> Atm we only use drm_framebuffer_remove in atomic drivers to nuke the fbdev
>>> one at unload. With your patch userspace can't get there easily, and hence
>>> it must be fixed. Maybe separate prep patch (also cc: stable) upfront?
>>>
>> Something like this?
>>
>> Unfortunately I need to collect acks first.
> Oh dear, we're back to that discussion about how to pull this off :( I
> forgot about all that, silly me ...
>
> For a much more minimal fix, what about a default rmfb helper which
> implements the right thing automatically depending upon DRIVER_ATOMIC,
> plus the hook only for i915 to get atomic behaviour? With that we only
> need ack for drm core + i915, which we can get fast ;-)
>
> Would then also mean that drm_atomic_remove_framebuffer() would need to be
> in drm_atomic.c probably, so that drm_crtc.c can call it.
>
> if (dev->driver->remove_fb)
> ret = dev->driver->remove_fb(fb);
> else if (drm_core_check_feature(dev, DRIVER_ATOMIC))
> ret = drm_atomic_remove_fb(fb);
> else
> ret = legacy_remove_fb(fb);
>
> Besides this, need some minimal kerneldoc from
> drm_atomic_remove_framebuffer().
>
Would work, also means less cruft. :) After i915 is converted it could go away..
~Maarten
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-22 11:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-21 14:11 [PATCH] drm/core: Do not preserve framebuffer on rmfb Maarten Lankhorst
2016-03-21 17:34 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: warning for " Patchwork
2016-03-21 17:37 ` [PATCH] " Daniel Vetter
2016-03-22 9:32 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2016-03-22 9:32 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2016-03-22 10:50 ` Daniel Vetter
2016-03-22 10:50 ` Daniel Vetter
2016-03-22 10:53 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2016-03-22 10:53 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2016-03-22 11:09 ` Daniel Vetter
2016-03-22 11:09 ` Daniel Vetter
2016-03-22 11:24 ` Maarten Lankhorst [this message]
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=56F12B50.6030903@linux.intel.com \
--to=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=thellstrom@vmware.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.