Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH -next] drm/i915: Fix missing unlock on error in i915_gem_init_hw()

[Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>]

On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 08:55:59AM +0800, weiyj_lk@163.com wrote:
> From: Wei Yongjun <yongjun_wei@trendmicro.com.cn>
> 
> Add the missing unlock before return from function i915_gem_init_hw()
> in the error handling case.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <yongjun_wei@trendmicro.com.cn>

Applied, thanks for the patch. Two minor comments:
- Please mention the commit that introduced the issue next time around.
  I've added that while applying.

- The usual patter is

	if (ret)
		goto out;


	/* more code */

out:
	mutex_unlock();
	return ret;

This would work really well in i915_gem_init_hw and besides the
code-cleanup also prevents such a fumble in the future. If you feel like
please submit that patch to convert init_hw to this shared unlock code
pattern, too.

Thanks, Daniel
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> index d2ba315..3eeb2d0 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> @@ -4879,8 +4879,10 @@ i915_gem_init_hw(struct drm_device *dev)
>  	i915_gem_init_swizzling(dev);
>  
>  	ret = dev_priv->gt.init_rings(dev);
> -	if (ret)
> +	if (ret) {
> +		mutex_unlock(&dev->struct_mutex);
>  		return ret;
> +	}
>  
>  	for (i = 0; i < NUM_L3_SLICES(dev); i++)
>  		i915_gem_l3_remap(&dev_priv->ring[RCS], i);
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx


-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch