public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
To: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@kernel.org>
Cc: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>,
	Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>,
	 Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
	Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>,
	Thomas Zimmermann	 <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,  linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/gpuvm: take refcount on DRM device
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2026 18:19:02 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c9ce94ae6c7956d63ca51f6e979100ec713f68f2.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DHY2RPB300R2.1XXG87NPYFRCI@kernel.org>

On Mon, 2026-04-20 at 17:08 +0200, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> On Mon Apr 20, 2026 at 11:28 AM CEST, Thomas Hellström wrote:
> > I agree with your reasoning here, but current fact is that most (if
> > not
> > all) holders of a drm device reference (files, pagemaps, dma-bufs)
> > currently also hold a module reference to protect against this, and
> > drm_gpuvm would be an outlier.
> 
> I'm not convinced; if the DRM device has the requirement to not
> outlive the
> module it is associated with, then the DRM device code has to take
> care of this
> requirement, and not every caller of drm_dev_get().
> 
> Besides that, if GPUVM holds the module reference count on behalf of
> the DRM
> device, it has the same effect that you rightfully point out below --
> it breaks
> rmmod.
> 
> > To fix this properly (lifting that requirement) one could introduce
> > a
> > drm device count in the module and have the module exit function
> > wait
> > for it to become zero, *and* that the code that did the last
> > decrement
> > finished executing.
> > 
> > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/712146/?series=163298&rev=1
> 
> This looks like a reasonable fix to me. And it makes me conclude that
> we
> basically agree on everything. :)

Yes, unless we'd want to do a similar wait for gpuvms before returning
from the close() callback: If we assume all GPUVMs are tied to an open
drm file, that would conceptually be nicer IMO but I agree if gpuvm
drivers implement something like the above per-driver device count,
that would be unnecessary.

Thanks,
Thomas


> 
> Regarding the reference count in the meantime, it remains that
> omitting it does
> not solve the underlying problem, i.e. I still think it is
> orthogonal.
> 
> > Or one could also have the drm device hold a reference count on the
> > driver module, but that would block unloading without previous
> > unbind
> > which is not typical driver behaviour and would likely be seen as a
> > regression.

      reply	other threads:[~2026-04-20 16:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-16 13:10 [PATCH] drm/gpuvm: take refcount on DRM device Alice Ryhl
2026-04-16 15:26 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-04-17 14:41 ` Thomas Hellström
2026-04-17 19:33   ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-04-20  9:28     ` Thomas Hellström
2026-04-20 15:08       ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-04-20 16:19         ` Thomas Hellström [this message]

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=c9ce94ae6c7956d63ca51f6e979100ec713f68f2.camel@linux.intel.com \
    --to=thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=aliceryhl@google.com \
    --cc=dakr@kernel.org \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
    --cc=mripard@kernel.org \
    --cc=tzimmermann@suse.de \
    /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