Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> We need to allow concurrent intel_context_unpin, which means avoiding
> doing destructive operations like intel_ring_reset(). This was already
> fixed for intel_ring_unpin() in commit 0725d9a31869 ("drm/i915/gt: Make
> intel_ring_unpin() safe for concurrent pint"), but I overlooked that
> execlists_context_unpin() also made the same mistake.
>
> Reported-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@xxxxxxxxx>
> Fixes: 841350223816 ("drm/i915/gt: Drop mutex serialisation between context pin/unpin")
> References: 0725d9a31869 ("drm/i915/gt: Make intel_ring_unpin() safe for concurrent pint")
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c | 1 -
> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c
> index a8fe2f16c910..999fe82190da 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c
> @@ -2532,7 +2532,6 @@ static void execlists_context_unpin(struct intel_context *ce)
> ce->engine);
>
> i915_gem_object_unpin_map(ce->state->obj);
> - intel_ring_reset(ce->ring, ce->ring->tail);
It seems we have entered an era where intel_ring_reset()
is actually resetting the ring. Long live the engine(s)!
Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> }
>
> static void
> --
> 2.25.0
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
