在 2018/11/24 2:10, Koenig, Christian 写道: > Am 23.11.18 um 15:10 schrieb Zhou, David(ChunMing): >> 在 2018/11/23 21:30, Koenig, Christian 写道: >>> Am 23.11.18 um 14:27 schrieb Zhou, David(ChunMing): >>>> 在 2018/11/22 19:25, Christian König 写道: >>>>> Am 22.11.18 um 07:56 schrieb Sharma, Deepak: >>>>>> when returned fence is not valid mostly due to userspace ignored >>>>>> previous error causes NULL pointer dereference. >>>>> Again, this is clearly incorrect. The my other mails on the >>>>> earlier patch. >>>> Sorry for I didn't get your history, but looks from the patch >>>> itself, it is still a valid patch, isn't it? >>> No, the semantic of amdgpu_ctx_get_fence() is that we return NULL >>> when the fence is already signaled. >>> >>> So this patch could totally break userspace because it changes the >>> behavior when we try to sync to an already signaled fence. >> Ah, I got your meaning, how about attached patch? > Yeah something like this, but I would just give the > DRM_SYNCOBJ_CREATE_SIGNALED instead. > > I mean that's what this flag is good for isn't it? Yeah, I give a flag initally when creating patch, but as you know, there is a swich case not be able to use that flag: case AMDGPU_FENCE_TO_HANDLE_GET_SYNC_FILE_FD: fd = get_unused_fd_flags(O_CLOEXEC); if (fd < 0) { dma_fence_put(fence); return fd; } sync_file = sync_file_create(fence); dma_fence_put(fence); if (!sync_file) { put_unused_fd(fd); return -ENOMEM; } fd_install(fd, sync_file->file); info->out.handle = fd; return 0; So I change to stub fence instead. -David I have not applied this patch. The issue was trying to address is when amdgpu_cs_ioctl() failed due to low memory (ENOMEM) but userspace chose to proceed and called amdgpu_cs_fence_to_handle_ioctl(). In amdgpu_cs_fence_to_handle_ioctl(), fence is null and later causing NULL pointer dereference, this patch was to avoid that and system panic But I understand now that its a valid case retuning NULL if fence was already signaled but need to handle case so avoid kernel panic. Seems David patch should fix this, I will test it tomorrow. -Deepak > > Christian. > >> -David >>> If that patch was applied then please revert it immediately. >>> >>> Christian. >>> >>>> -David >>>>> If you have already pushed the patch then please revert. >>>>> >>>>> Christian. >>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Deepak Sharma <Deepak.Sharma@xxxxxxx> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_cs.c | 2 ++ >>>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_cs.c >>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_cs.c >>>>>> index 024dfbd87f11..14166cd8a12f 100644 >>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_cs.c >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_cs.c >>>>>> @@ -1403,6 +1403,8 @@ static struct dma_fence >>>>>> *amdgpu_cs_get_fence(struct amdgpu_device *adev, >>>>>> fence = amdgpu_ctx_get_fence(ctx, entity, user->seq_no); >>>>>> amdgpu_ctx_put(ctx); >>>>>> + if(!fence) >>>>>> + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); >>>>>> return fence; >>>>>> } _______________________________________________ amd-gfx mailing list amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx