2017년 05월 31일 17:45에 Daniel Vetter 이(가) 쓴 글: > On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 09:03:34AM +0900, Inki Dae wrote: >> Hi Daniel, >> >> 2017년 05월 24일 23:51에 Daniel Vetter 이(가) 쓴 글: >>> Only in the load failure path, where the hardware is quiet anyway. >>> >>> Cc: Inki Dae <inki.dae@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Joonyoung Shim <jy0922.shim@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Seung-Woo Kim <sw0312.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c | 4 +--- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c >>> index 50294a7bd29d..1c814b9342af 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/exynos/exynos_drm_drv.c >>> @@ -376,7 +376,7 @@ static int exynos_drm_bind(struct device *dev) >>> /* Probe non kms sub drivers and virtual display driver. */ >>> ret = exynos_drm_device_subdrv_probe(drm); >>> if (ret) >>> - goto err_cleanup_vblank; >>> + goto err_unbind_all; >> >> With this change shouldn't you post the patch to remove drm_vblank_init and setup vblank stuff in drm_crtc_init together? >> I couldn't find the relevant patch on your patch series[1]. > > No, drm_vblank_cleanup is already called in the core. The only reason to > call it in the driver is to fall back from kms to ums when irq setup > somehow failed, then you need to disable vblank support again. > > The only driver which ever needed this was radeon, and radeon long ago > lost ums support. drm_vblank_cleanup is already called for you, and most > drivers don't even do this cleanup call. But somehow a lot of people > copied from radeon without understanding what it does. > > Looking at the last patch in this series might help a bit in understanding > the history here. Can you pls reevaluate the patch? Thanks for explaination. Confirmed. Reviewed-by: Inki Dae <inki.dae@xxxxxxxxxxx> Thanks, Inki Dae > > Thanks, Daniel > >> As of now, I think resource leak would happen with this patch only. >> >> Thanks, >> Inki Dae >> >> [1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/dri-devel/msg142387.html >> >>> >>> drm_mode_config_reset(drm); >>> >>> @@ -407,8 +407,6 @@ static int exynos_drm_bind(struct device *dev) >>> exynos_drm_fbdev_fini(drm); >>> drm_kms_helper_poll_fini(drm); >>> exynos_drm_device_subdrv_remove(drm); >>> -err_cleanup_vblank: >>> - drm_vblank_cleanup(drm); >>> err_unbind_all: >>> component_unbind_all(drm->dev, drm); >>> err_mode_config_cleanup: >>> > _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
