From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: lauraa@codeaurora.org (Laura Abbott) Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 07:56:53 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] CMA: correct unlock target In-Reply-To: <5386E313.6070705@samsung.com> References: <1401344958-3790-1-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com> <5386E313.6070705@samsung.com> Message-ID: <53874AB5.5010908@codeaurora.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 5/29/2014 12:34 AM, Marek Szyprowski wrote: > Hello, > > On 2014-05-29 08:29, Joonsoo Kim wrote: >> 'cma: Remove potential deadlock situation' introduces per cma area mutex >> for bitmap management. It is good, but there is one mistake. When we >> can't find appropriate area in bitmap, we release cma_mutex global lock >> rather than cma->lock and this is a bug. So fix it. >> >> Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim > > Thanks for spotting this issue. I've added it to my tree. > >> diff --git a/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c b/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c >> index 6f6bffc..83969f8 100644 >> --- a/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c >> +++ b/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c >> @@ -331,7 +331,7 @@ struct page *dma_alloc_from_contiguous(struct device *dev, int count, >> pageno = bitmap_find_next_zero_area(cma->bitmap, cma->count, >> start, count, mask); >> if (pageno >= cma->count) { >> - mutex_unlock(&cma_mutex); >> + mutex_unlock(&cma->lock); >> break; >> } >> bitmap_set(cma->bitmap, pageno, count); > > Best regards Acked-by: Laura Abbott Who actually ended up picking up that patch? I sent it out but didn't realize it had been picked up. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation