The subject doesn't match the change. This changes ttm_bo_cleanup_refs,
not ttm_buffer_object_transfer.
On 2019-11-11 9:58 a.m., Christian König wrote:
The function is always called with deleted BOs.
While at it cleanup the indentation as well.
Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c | 12 +++---------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c
index 7e7925fecd9e..1178980f4147 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c
@@ -527,14 +527,9 @@ static int ttm_bo_cleanup_refs(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo,
bool interruptible, bool no_wait_gpu,
bool unlock_resv)
{
- struct dma_resv *resv;
+ struct dma_resv *resv = &bo->base._resv;
int ret;
- if (unlikely(list_empty(&bo->ddestroy)))
Would it make sense to add a BUG_ON or WARN_ON here to check the
assumption made by this code?
Regards,
Felix
- resv = bo->base.resv;
- else
- resv = &bo->base._resv;
-
if (dma_resv_test_signaled_rcu(resv, true))
ret = 0;
else
@@ -547,9 +542,8 @@ static int ttm_bo_cleanup_refs(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo,
dma_resv_unlock(bo->base.resv);
spin_unlock(&ttm_bo_glob.lru_lock);
- lret = dma_resv_wait_timeout_rcu(resv, true,
- interruptible,
- 30 * HZ);
+ lret = dma_resv_wait_timeout_rcu(resv, true, interruptible,
+ 30 * HZ);
if (lret < 0)
return lret;
_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
