On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 01:37:47PM +0200, Christian König wrote: > Am 17.05.21 um 16:57 schrieb Daniel Vetter: > > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 10:09:13AM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: > > > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 7:57 AM Christian König > > > <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > DMA-buf internal users call the pin/unpin functions without having a > > > > dynamic attachment. Avoid the warning and backtrace in the logs. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx> > > > > Bugs: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/3481 > > > > Fixes: c545781e1c55 ("dma-buf: doc polish for pin/unpin") > > > > CC: stable@xxxxxxxxxx > > > Reviewed-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@xxxxxxx> > > Hm this means we're losing the dma_resv_assert_held check, do we have that > > in amdgpu callbacks to make sure we're not accidentally breaking stuff > > later on? > > Mhm, well this is just for calling the pin/unpin internally from the DMA-buf > framework itself. It's both, but currently I think no users for it (since it would be pinning for display). Maybe we could do __ internal wrappers to keep the lockdep checks? > Need to double check, but I think all those cases either have a > dma_resv_assert_held() or are locking the reservation themselves before > calling the function. Yeah right now it's still all good, but that changes easily :-) > But yeah, rather good point. Do you plan to type something that I can ack? -Daniel > > Christian. > > > > > But yeah lgtm, Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > > > > > > --- > > > > drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c | 10 +++++----- > > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c > > > > index f264b70c383e..eadd1eaa2fb5 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-buf.c > > > > @@ -760,7 +760,7 @@ dma_buf_dynamic_attach(struct dma_buf *dmabuf, struct device *dev, > > > > > > > > if (dma_buf_is_dynamic(attach->dmabuf)) { > > > > dma_resv_lock(attach->dmabuf->resv, NULL); > > > > - ret = dma_buf_pin(attach); > > > > + ret = dmabuf->ops->pin(attach); > > > > if (ret) > > > > goto err_unlock; > > > > } > > > > @@ -786,7 +786,7 @@ dma_buf_dynamic_attach(struct dma_buf *dmabuf, struct device *dev, > > > > > > > > err_unpin: > > > > if (dma_buf_is_dynamic(attach->dmabuf)) > > > > - dma_buf_unpin(attach); > > > > + dmabuf->ops->unpin(attach); > > > > > > > > err_unlock: > > > > if (dma_buf_is_dynamic(attach->dmabuf)) > > > > @@ -843,7 +843,7 @@ void dma_buf_detach(struct dma_buf *dmabuf, struct dma_buf_attachment *attach) > > > > __unmap_dma_buf(attach, attach->sgt, attach->dir); > > > > > > > > if (dma_buf_is_dynamic(attach->dmabuf)) { > > > > - dma_buf_unpin(attach); > > > > + dmabuf->ops->unpin(attach); > > > > dma_resv_unlock(attach->dmabuf->resv); > > > > } > > > > } > > > > @@ -956,7 +956,7 @@ struct sg_table *dma_buf_map_attachment(struct dma_buf_attachment *attach, > > > > if (dma_buf_is_dynamic(attach->dmabuf)) { > > > > dma_resv_assert_held(attach->dmabuf->resv); > > > > if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMABUF_MOVE_NOTIFY)) { > > > > - r = dma_buf_pin(attach); > > > > + r = attach->dmabuf->ops->pin(attach); > > > > if (r) > > > > return ERR_PTR(r); > > > > } > > > > @@ -968,7 +968,7 @@ struct sg_table *dma_buf_map_attachment(struct dma_buf_attachment *attach, > > > > > > > > if (IS_ERR(sg_table) && dma_buf_is_dynamic(attach->dmabuf) && > > > > !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMABUF_MOVE_NOTIFY)) > > > > - dma_buf_unpin(attach); > > > > + attach->dmabuf->ops->unpin(attach); > > > > > > > > if (!IS_ERR(sg_table) && attach->dmabuf->ops->cache_sgt_mapping) { > > > > attach->sgt = sg_table; > > > > -- > > > > 2.25.1 > > > > > -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch
