On ma, 2016-09-19 at 09:38 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 11:31:37AM +0300, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
> >
> > On pe, 2016-09-16 at 20:23 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > >
> > > int i915_gem_freeze_late(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> > > {
> > > >
> > > > > > > > struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj;
> > > @@ -4692,7 +4705,8 @@ int i915_gem_freeze_late(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> > > >
> > > > > > > > * the objects as well.
> > > > > > > > */
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > > > > - i915_gem_shrink_all(dev_priv);
> > > > > > + mutex_lock(&dev_priv->drm.struct_mutex);
> >
> > Previously the shrinking here was without a mutex. And the new
> > shrinking during _freeze is also mutex protected, any specific reason?
>
> Silencing lockdep. We know we are single threaded here, but lockdep
> doesn't. This version of i915_gem_shrink() doesn't automagically take
> the struct_mutex (later versions do).
Throw the info to commit message. Then all good.
Regards, Joonas
> -Chris
>
--
Joonas Lahtinen
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
