On 11.09.2012 18:12, Jerome Glisse wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Christian König
<deathsimple@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It is unnecessary when we remove the va in drm_close.
Signed-off-by: Christian König <deathsimple@xxxxxxxxxxx>
NAK there is case for which drm_close is not call like ib pool and
other iirc. This clear va is really a safety net.
Ah, ok that makes sense. Sorry I was just a bit confused about that.
Christian.
---
drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_object.c | 11 -----------
1 file changed, 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_object.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_object.c
index 8d23b7e..d210fe5 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_object.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_object.c
@@ -46,16 +46,6 @@ static void radeon_bo_clear_surface_reg(struct radeon_bo *bo);
* function are calling it.
*/
-void radeon_bo_clear_va(struct radeon_bo *bo)
-{
- struct radeon_bo_va *bo_va, *tmp;
-
- list_for_each_entry_safe(bo_va, tmp, &bo->va, bo_list) {
- /* remove from all vm address space */
- radeon_vm_bo_rmv(bo->rdev, bo_va->vm, bo);
- }
-}
-
static void radeon_ttm_bo_destroy(struct ttm_buffer_object *tbo)
{
struct radeon_bo *bo;
@@ -65,7 +55,6 @@ static void radeon_ttm_bo_destroy(struct ttm_buffer_object *tbo)
list_del_init(&bo->list);
mutex_unlock(&bo->rdev->gem.mutex);
radeon_bo_clear_surface_reg(bo);
- radeon_bo_clear_va(bo);
drm_gem_object_release(&bo->gem_base);
kfree(bo);
}
--
1.7.9.5
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
