On 08/01/2017 03:14 PM, David Lechner wrote:
If we return here and import_attach is true, then dma_buf_end_cpu_access()
will not be called balance dma_buf_begin_cpu_access().
Fix by setting ret instead of returning.
Signed-off-by: David Lechner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/tinydrm/mipi-dbi.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tinydrm/mipi-dbi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tinydrm/mipi-dbi.c
index c83eeb7..e10fa4b 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tinydrm/mipi-dbi.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tinydrm/mipi-dbi.c
@@ -183,7 +183,8 @@ static int mipi_dbi_buf_copy(void *dst, struct drm_framebuffer *fb,
dev_err_once(fb->dev->dev, "Format is not supported: %s\n",
drm_get_format_name(fb->format->format,
&format_name));
- return -EINVAL;
+ ret = -EINVAL;
+ break;
}
if (import_attach)
I just realized that the next line here can mask ret.
if (import_attach)
ret = dma_buf_end_cpu_access(import_attach->dmabuf,
DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
So, we should either ignore the return value from
dma_buf_end_cpu_access() always or add some logic to ignore it if ret is
already an error.
In some of the other patches I have been sending, we have the same
situation. I those, I have opted to just ignore the return value from
dma_buf_end_cpu_access(). e.g...
if (import_attach)
dma_buf_end_cpu_access(import_attach->dmabuf, DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
Is this a reasonable thing to do?
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
