On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 14:38:51 +0100, Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 09:30:33PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > I haven't looked much at the patch, but the deferred-free looks more bogus > the more I stare at it. As long as an object is active, we /should/ have a > reference on it, so we should never fail to wait for outstanding rendering > on the final free. The only execption is the ilk/vt-d unbind w/a, but that > one is already uninterruptible. > > So I think we should just drop the deferred free list, check for any > errors from unbind with a WARN_ON and bail out (leaking the bo) in that > case. Right. I am just worried because we did have a bug with a case where it appeared that we did free an active object. I will have to dig through that and see if could be explained by some other use-after-free. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
