From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] drm/i915: fix possible refcount leak
 when resetting forcewake
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 21:38:26 +0300
Message-ID: <1402079906.4193.11.camel@ideak-mobl>
References: <1402048779-14902-1-git-send-email-imre.deak@intel.com>
 <1402052677-19607-1-git-send-email-imre.deak@intel.com>
 <20140606110843.GF22214@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com>
 <20140606174619.GS7416@phenom.ffwll.local>
Reply-To: imre.deak@intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24])
 by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A560B6EAB6
 for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>; Fri,  6 Jun 2014 11:38:41 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20140606174619.GS7416@phenom.ffwll.local>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
 <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
 <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org
Sender: "Intel-gfx" <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Fri, 2014-06-06 at 19:46 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 12:08:43PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 02:04:37PM +0300, Imre Deak wrote:
> > > If the timer putting the last forcewake refcount was pending and we
> > > canceled it, we'll leak the corresponding forcewake and RPM references.
> > > 
> > > v2:
> > > - do the ptr casting at the caller instead of adding a separate helper
> > >   for this (Chris)
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> 
> Both patches merged to dinq (Chris clarified on irc that his r-b is for
> both).
>
> Since this only blows up in a super-contrived testcase I don't
> think this is material for -fixes.

Note that the issue fixed by 1/2 could also happen normally, though the
window for race is small. One scenario would be runtime resume
->deferred rps_enable followed directly by system suspend or gpu reset.

--Imre