Quoting Matthew Auld (2019-05-31 21:06:46) > On Thu, 30 May 2019 at 21:35, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_stolen.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_stolen.c > > index 9080a736663a..8b3a23bff7f6 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_stolen.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_stolen.c > > @@ -690,7 +690,8 @@ i915_gem_object_create_stolen_for_preallocated(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv > > mutex_unlock(&ggtt->vm.mutex); > > > > spin_lock(&dev_priv->mm.obj_lock); > > - list_move_tail(&obj->mm.link, &dev_priv->mm.bound_list); > > + if (i915_gem_object_is_shrinkable(obj)) > > + list_move_tail(&obj->mm.link, &dev_priv->mm.bound_list); > > Always false, no, or maybe just future thinking? Always false, I was just thinking of being consistent (i.e. I grepped for bound_list). Probably better to mark it with a GEM_BUG_ON indeed. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
