Hi,
> > +static void *kmap_atomic_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf, unsigned long page_num)
> > +{
> > + struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
> > + struct page *page = ubuf->pages[page_num];
> > +
> > + return kmap_atomic(page);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void *kmap_udmabuf(struct dma_buf *buf, unsigned long page_num)
> > +{
> > + struct udmabuf *ubuf = buf->priv;
> > + struct page *page = ubuf->pages[page_num];
> > +
> > + return kmap(page);
> > +}
>
> The above leaks like mad since no kunamp?
/me checks code. Oops. Yes.
The docs say map() is required and unmap() is not (for both atomic and
non-atomic cases), so I assumed there is a default implementation just
doing kunmap(page). Which is not the case. /me looks a bit surprised.
I'll fix it for v4.
> Also I think we have 0 users of the kmap atomic interfaces ... so not sure
> whether it's worth it to implement those.
Well, the docs are correct. kmap_atomic() is required, dma-buf.c calls
the function pointer without checking it exists beforehand ...
cheers,
Gerd
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
