From: "Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
To: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
Christian Koenig <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH] dma-buf/dma-fence: Use a successful read_trylock() annotation for dma_fence_begin_signalling()
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 15:03:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <60bb9e25-062c-a893-d5cc-1c6f1362703c@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230428125233.228353-1-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
On 4/28/23 14:52, Thomas Hellström wrote:
> Condsider the following call sequence:
>
> /* Upper layer */
> dma_fence_begin_signalling();
> lock(tainted_shared_lock);
> /* Driver callback */
> dma_fence_begin_signalling();
> ...
The "Upper layer" here currently being the drm scheduler and "Driver
callback" being an xe scheduler callback.
While opt-in annotating the drm scheduler would achieve the same result,
I think this patch should be considered anyway, as I don't think we will
miss any true lockdep violations as a result of it.
/Thomas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-28 13:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-28 12:52 [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH] dma-buf/dma-fence: Use a successful read_trylock() annotation for dma_fence_begin_signalling() Thomas Hellström
2023-04-28 13:03 ` Thomas Hellström [this message]
2023-04-28 17:55 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2023-04-29 2:50 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
2023-05-26 11:11 ` [Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH] " Thomas Hellström
2024-08-14 7:10 ` Daniel Vetter
2024-08-14 8:37 ` Thomas Hellström
2024-09-18 12:34 ` RESEND " Thomas Hellström
2024-09-18 13:18 ` Christian König
2024-09-20 7:46 ` Thomas Hellström
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=60bb9e25-062c-a893-d5cc-1c6f1362703c@linux.intel.com \
--to=thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox