Hi Am 10.05.22 um 10:30 schrieb Javier Martinez Canillas:
Hello Thomas, On 5/10/22 10:04, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:Hi Am 10.05.22 um 00:42 schrieb Javier Martinez Canillas:On 5/10/22 00:22, Andrzej Hajda wrote: [snip]static void drm_fbdev_fb_destroy(struct fb_info *info) { + if (info->cmap.len) + fb_dealloc_cmap(&info->cmap); + drm_fbdev_release(info->par); + framebuffer_release(info);I would put drm_fbdev_release at the beginning - it cancels workers which could expect cmap to be still valid.Indeed, you are correct again. [0] is the final version of the patch I've but don't have an i915 test machine to give it a try. I'll test tomorrow on my test systems to verify that it doesn't cause any regressions since with other DRM drivers.You have to go through all DRM drivers that call drm_fb_helper_fini() and make sure that they free fb_info. For example armada appears to be leaking now. [1]But shouldn't fb_info be freed when unregister_framebuffer() is called through drm_dev_unregister() ? AFAICT the call chain is the following: drm_put_dev() drm_dev_unregister() drm_client_dev_unregister() drm_fbdev_client_unregister() drm_fb_helper_unregister_fbi() unregister_framebuffer() do_unregister_framebuffer() put_fb_info() drm_fbdev_fb_destroy() framebuffer_release() which is the reason why I believe that drm_fb_helper_fini() should be an internal static function and only called from drm_fbdev_fb_destroy(). Drivers shouldn't really explicitly call this helper in my opinion.
Thanks. That makes sense. Best regards Thomas
-- Thomas Zimmermann Graphics Driver Developer SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany (HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg) Geschäftsführer: Ivo Totev
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
