Re: [PATCH v1 1/9] drm/gem: Consider GEM object reclaimable if shrinking fails

[Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@arm.com>]

On Fri, Jan 09, 2026 at 02:07:53PM +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> If the object wasn't moved to a different LRU after the shrink callback
> is called, it means the buffer is still reclaimable. Update the remaining
> counter to reflect that.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>

Reviewed-by: Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@arm.com>

Best regards,
Liviu

> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem.c | 10 ++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem.c
> index f7cbf6e8d1e0..442853511106 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem.c
> @@ -1671,6 +1671,16 @@ drm_gem_lru_scan(struct drm_gem_lru *lru,
>  			 */
>  			WARN_ON(obj->lru == &still_in_lru);
>  			WARN_ON(obj->lru == lru);
> +		} else if (obj->lru == &still_in_lru) {
> +			/*
> +			 * If the object wasn't moved and wasn't shrunk either,
> +			 * it's still remaining as reclaimable. Note that
> +			 * obj->lru is supposed to be checked with the LRU lock
> +			 * held for an accurate result, but we don't care about
> +			 * accuracy here. Worst thing that could happen is an
> +			 * extra scan.
> +			 */
> +			*remaining += obj->size >> PAGE_SHIFT;
>  		}
>  
>  		dma_resv_unlock(obj->resv);
> -- 
> 2.52.0
>