On 21/06/2021 14:07, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
Op 21-06-2021 om 14:52 schreef Tvrtko Ursulin:
On 21/06/2021 13:08, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
I had some questions on the trybot mailing list, let me copy&paste..
On 21/06/2021 12:41, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
It doesn't work for legacy ring submission, and is in the best case
ignored.
Looks rejected instead of ignored:
static int set_ringsize(struct i915_gem_context *ctx,
struct drm_i915_gem_context_param *args)
{
if (!HAS_LOGICAL_RING_CONTEXTS(ctx->i915))
return -ENODEV;
In the worst case we end up freeing engine->legacy.ring for all other
active engines, resulting in a use-after-free.
Worst case is cloning because ring_context_alloc is not taking a reference to engine->legacy.ring, or something else?
No can't be that, it was my incomplete analysis last week. Since ring_context_destroy does not actually free the legacy ring I don't see any use after free paths.
Regards,
Hmm, it gets stuck inside intel_context_set_ring_size when cloning engines..
I guess it can't happen in practice, just the code introduces the race by preallocating
inside intel_context_lock_pinned()..
"The code" being the rest of your series? Haven't looked in there, but
can't find a problem in upstream. Since as you say, copy_ring_size will
run but intel_context_set_ring_size will not free-and-allocate old/new
ring since cloned context does not have a state allocated yet.
Regards,
Tvrtko
copy_ring_size() should only be called for HAS_LOGICAL_RING_CONTEXTS().
I guess that makes this patch obsolete. It can safely be dropped from the series,
I think I should probably introduce a check to only set the size when HAS_LOGICAL_RING_CONTEXTS
evaluates to true, but that wouldn't block the rest of this series.
~Maarten
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
