On 2018年10月23日 15:51, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Chunming Zhou (2018-10-23 02:50:08)v2: add a mutex between sync_cb execution and free. v3: clearly separating the roles for pt_lock and cb_mutex (Chris) v4: the cb_mutex should be taken outside of the pt_lock around this if() block. (Chris) Tested by syncobj_basic and syncobj_wait of igt. Signed-off-by: Chunming Zhou <david1.zhou@xxxxxxx> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx> --- drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++----------------- include/drm/drm_syncobj.h | 8 ++++-- 2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c index 57bf6006394d..315f08132f6d 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c @@ -125,23 +125,24 @@ static int drm_syncobj_fence_get_or_add_callback(struct drm_syncobj *syncobj, if (!ret) return 1;- spin_lock(&syncobj->lock);+ mutex_lock(&syncobj->cb_mutex); /* We've already tried once to get a fence and failed. Now that we * have the lock, try one more time just to be sure we don't add a * callback when a fence has already been set. */ + spin_lock(&syncobj->pt_lock); if (!list_empty(&syncobj->signal_pt_list)) { - spin_unlock(&syncobj->lock); + spin_unlock(&syncobj->pt_lock); drm_syncobj_search_fence(syncobj, 0, 0, fence); if (*fence)mutex_unlock(&syncobj->cb_mutex);
fixed.
With that, Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks
Can you please resend with Cc: intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx so we can double check the fix.
resent, Could you help to submit patch to drm-misc? Thanks, David Zhou
-Chris
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
