On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 13:35:33 +0100, Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote: > The intention was to allow the caller to avoid a failure to queue a > request having already written commands to the ring. However, this is a > moot point as the i915_add_request() can fail for other reasons than a > mere allocation failure and those failure cases are more likely than > ENOMEM. So the overlay code already had to handle i915_add_request() > failures, and due to > > commit 3bb73aba1ed5198a2c1dfaac4f3c95459930d84a > Author: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk> > Date: Fri Jul 20 12:40:59 2012 +0100 > > drm/i915: Allow late allocation of request for i915_add_request() > > the error handling code in intel_overlay.c was subject to causing > double-frees. > > Rather than further complicate i915_add_request() and callers, realise > the battle is lost and adapt intel_overlay.c to take advantage of the > late allocation of requests. Ah crap. Compile tested, obviously not run. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
