On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 02:39:17PM +0800, Caicai wrote:
> When a qxl resource is released, the list that needs to be released is
> fetched from the linked list ring and cleared. When you empty the list,
> instead of trying to determine whether the ttm buffer object for each
> qxl in the list is locked, you release the qxl object and remove the
> element from the list until the list is empty. It was found that the
> linked list was cleared first, and that the lock on the corresponding
> ttm Bo for the QXL had not been released, so that the new qxl could not
> be locked when it used the TTM.
So the dma_resv_reserve_shared() call in qxl_release_validate_bo() is
unbalanced? Because the dma_resv_unlock() call in
qxl_release_fence_buffer_objects() never happens due to
qxl_release_free_list() clearing the list beforehand? Is that correct?
The only way I see for this to happen is that the guest is preempted
between qxl_push_{cursor,command}_ring_release() and
qxl_release_fence_buffer_objects() calls. The host can complete the qxl
command then, signal the guest, and the IRQ handler calls
qxl_release_free_list() before qxl_release_fence_buffer_objects() runs.
Looking through the code I think it should be safe to simply swap the
qxl_release_fence_buffer_objects() +
qxl_push_{cursor,command}_ring_release() calls to close that race
window. Can you try that and see if it fixes the bug for you?
> if (flush)
> - flush_work(&qdev->gc_work);
> + //can't flush work, it may lead to deadlock
> + usleep_range(500, 1000);
> +
The commit message doesn't explain this chunk.
take care,
Gerd
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
