On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 12:02:42PM -0800, Rob Clark wrote: > From: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > vm_open() is not allowed to fail. Fortunately we are guaranteed that > the pages are already pinned, and only need to increment the refcnt. So > just increment it directly. I don't know anything about drm or gem, but I am wondering _how_ this would be guaranteed. Would it be through the pin function ? Just wondering, because that function does not seem to be mandatory. > > Fixes: 2194a63a818d ("drm: Add library for shmem backed GEM objects") > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_shmem_helper.c | 14 +++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_shmem_helper.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_shmem_helper.c > index 110a9eac2af8..9885ba64127f 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_shmem_helper.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_gem_shmem_helper.c > @@ -571,12 +571,20 @@ static void drm_gem_shmem_vm_open(struct vm_area_struct *vma) > { > struct drm_gem_object *obj = vma->vm_private_data; > struct drm_gem_shmem_object *shmem = to_drm_gem_shmem_obj(obj); > - int ret; > > WARN_ON(shmem->base.import_attach); > > - ret = drm_gem_shmem_get_pages(shmem); > - WARN_ON_ONCE(ret != 0); > + mutex_lock(&shmem->pages_lock); > + > + /* > + * We should have already pinned the pages, vm_open() just grabs should or guaranteed ? This sounds a bit weaker than the commit description. > + * an additional reference for the new mm the vma is getting > + * copied into. > + */ > + WARN_ON_ONCE(!shmem->pages_use_count); > + > + shmem->pages_use_count++; > + mutex_unlock(&shmem->pages_lock); The previous code, in that situation, would not increment pages_use_count, and it would not set not set shmem->pages. Hopefully, it would not try to do anything with the pages it was unable to get. The new code assumes that shmem->pages is valid even if pages_use_count is 0, while at the same time taking into account that this can possibly happen (or the WARN_ON_ONCE would not be needed). Again, I don't know anything about gem and drm, but it seems to me that there might now be a severe problem later on if the WARN_ON_ONCE() ever triggers. Thanks, Guenter > > drm_gem_vm_open(vma); > }