On 3/12/21 5:06 AM, Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote:
On 3/12/21 12:02 AM, Zack Rusin wrote:
On Mar 11, 2021, at 17:35, Thomas Hellström (Intel)
<thomas_os@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi, Zack
On 3/11/21 10:07 PM, Zack Rusin wrote:
On Mar 11, 2021, at 05:46, Thomas Hellström (Intel)
<thomas_os@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,
I tried latest drm-fixes today and saw a lot of these: Fallout from
ttm rework?
Yes, I fixed this in d1a73c641afd2617bd80bce8b71a096fc5b74b7e it was
in drm-misc-next in the drm-misc tree for a while but hasn’t been
merged for 5.12.
z
Hmm, yes but doesn't that fix trip the ttm_bo_unpin()
dma_resv_assert_held(bo->base.resv)?
No, doesn’t seem to. TBH I’m not sure why myself, but it seems to be
working fine.
With CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y I see this:
[ 7.117145] [drm] FIFO at 0x00000000fe000000 size is 8192 kiB
[ 7.117284] [drm] VRAM at 0x00000000e8000000 size is 131072 kiB
[ 7.117291] INFO: trying to register non-static key.
[ 7.117295] the code is fine but needs lockdep annotation.
[ 7.117298] turning off the locking correctness validator
Which will probably mask that dma_resv_assert_held(bo->base.resv)
Ah, yes, you're right. After fixing that I do see the
dma_resv_assert_held triggered. Technically trivially fixable with
ttm_bo_reserve/ttm_bo_unreserve around ttm_bo_unpin but it's a little
ugly that some places e.g. vmw_bo_unreference will require
ttm_bo_reserve/ttm_bo_unreserve around ttm_bo_unpin but some won't e.g.
vmw_mob_destroy won't because its lock is held by ttm_bo_delayed_delete
without a very clear indication within the function which is which.
z
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
