Re: [PATCH 1/5] dma-buf: cleanup dma_fence_unwrap selftest

["Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>]

Am 05.05.22 um 15:29 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
> On Wed, May 04, 2022 at 02:22:52PM +0200, Christian König wrote:
>> The selftests, fix the error handling, remove unused functions and stop
>> leaking memory in failed tests.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence-unwrap.c | 40 +++++++++++----------------
>>   1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence-unwrap.c b/drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence-unwrap.c
>> index 039f016b57be..59628add93f5 100644
>> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence-unwrap.c
>> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence-unwrap.c
>> @@ -4,27 +4,19 @@
>>    * Copyright (C) 2022 Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
>>    */
>>   
>> +#include <linux/dma-fence.h>
>> +#include <linux/dma-fence-array.h>
>> +#include <linux/dma-fence-chain.h>
>>   #include <linux/dma-fence-unwrap.h>
>> -#if 0
>> -#include <linux/kernel.h>
>> -#include <linux/kthread.h>
>> -#include <linux/mm.h>
>> -#include <linux/sched/signal.h>
>> -#include <linux/slab.h>
>> -#include <linux/spinlock.h>
>> -#include <linux/random.h>
>> -#endif
>>   
>>   #include "selftest.h"
>>   
>>   #define CHAIN_SZ (4 << 10)
>>   
>> -static inline struct mock_fence {
>> +struct mock_fence {
>>   	struct dma_fence base;
>>   	spinlock_t lock;
>> -} *to_mock_fence(struct dma_fence *f) {
>> -	return container_of(f, struct mock_fence, base);
>> -}
>> +};
>>   
>>   static const char *mock_name(struct dma_fence *f)
>>   {
>> @@ -45,7 +37,8 @@ static struct dma_fence *mock_fence(void)
>>   		return NULL;
>>   
>>   	spin_lock_init(&f->lock);
>> -	dma_fence_init(&f->base, &mock_ops, &f->lock, 0, 0);
>> +	dma_fence_init(&f->base, &mock_ops, &f->lock,
>> +		       dma_fence_context_alloc(1), 1);
>>   
>>   	return &f->base;
>>   }
>> @@ -113,7 +106,6 @@ static int sanitycheck(void *arg)
>>   	if (!chain)
>>   		return -ENOMEM;
>>   
>> -	dma_fence_signal(f);
>>   	dma_fence_put(chain);
>>   	return err;
>>   }
>> @@ -154,10 +146,10 @@ static int unwrap_array(void *arg)
>>   		err = -EINVAL;
>>   	}
>>   
>> -	dma_fence_signal(f1);
>> -	dma_fence_signal(f2);
>> +	dma_fence_put(f1);
>> +	dma_fence_put(f2);
> I'm completely lost on why you add these _put() calls?

Because my five year old had a nightmare and I had not enough caffeine 
in my blood stream on the next morning.

Fixed in the next round.

Thanks,
Christian.

>   The reference we
> create all get transferred over to the container object, and that takes
> care of releasing them.
>
> The other bits with error handling and code cleanup all look good, and
> dropping dma_fence_signal calls also makes sense. But this one I don't
> get.
> -Daniel
>
>>   	dma_fence_put(array);
>> -	return 0;
>> +	return err;
>>   }
>>   
>>   static int unwrap_chain(void *arg)
>> @@ -196,10 +188,10 @@ static int unwrap_chain(void *arg)
>>   		err = -EINVAL;
>>   	}
>>   
>> -	dma_fence_signal(f1);
>> -	dma_fence_signal(f2);
>> +	dma_fence_put(f1);
>> +	dma_fence_put(f2);
>>   	dma_fence_put(chain);
>> -	return 0;
>> +	return err;
>>   }
>>   
>>   static int unwrap_chain_array(void *arg)
>> @@ -242,10 +234,10 @@ static int unwrap_chain_array(void *arg)
>>   		err = -EINVAL;
>>   	}
>>   
>> -	dma_fence_signal(f1);
>> -	dma_fence_signal(f2);
>> +	dma_fence_put(f1);
>> +	dma_fence_put(f2);
>>   	dma_fence_put(chain);
>> -	return 0;
>> +	return err;
>>   }
>>   
>>   int dma_fence_unwrap(void)
>> -- 
>> 2.25.1
>>