On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 11:51:15AM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> Otherwise ttm throws a WARN because we try to pin without a reservation.
>
> Fixes: 9d36d4320462 ("drm/qxl: switch over to the new pin interface")
> Signed-off-by: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_object.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_object.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_object.c
> index d3635e3e3267..eb45267d51db 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_object.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_object.c
> @@ -145,7 +145,7 @@ int qxl_bo_create(struct qxl_device *qdev,
> return r;
> }
> if (pinned)
> - ttm_bo_pin(&bo->tbo);
> + qxl_bo_pin(bo);
I think this is now after ttm_bo_init, and at that point the object is
visible to lru users and everything. So I do think you need to grab locks
here instead of just incrementing the pin count alone.
It's also I think a bit racy, since ttm_bo_init drops the lock, so someone
might have snuck in and evicted the object already.
I think what you need is to call ttm_bo_init_reserved, then ttm_bo_pin,
then ttm_bo_unreserve, all explicitly.
-Daniel
> *bo_ptr = bo;
> return 0;
> }
> --
> 2.27.0
>
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
