Am 29.11.21 um 13:23 schrieb Thomas Hellström:
Hi, Christian,
On Mon, 2021-11-29 at 09:21 +0100, Christian König wrote:
Am 29.11.21 um 08:35 schrieb Thomas Hellström:
If a dma_fence_array is reported signaled by a call to
dma_fence_is_signaled(), it may leak the PENDING_ERROR status.
Fix this by clearing the PENDING_ERROR status if we return true in
dma_fence_array_signaled().
Fixes: 1f70b8b812f3 ("dma-fence: Propagate errors to dma-fence-
array container")
Cc: linaro-mm-sig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx>
How are the dma-buf / dma-fence patches typically merged? If i915 is
the only fence->error user, could we take this through drm-intel to
avoid a backmerge for upcoming i915 work?
Well that one here looks like a bugfix to me, so either through
drm-misc-fixes ore some i915 -fixes branch sounds fine to me.
If you have any new development based on that a backmerge of the -fixes
into your -next branch is unavoidable anyway.
Regards,
Christian.
/Thomas
---
drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c | 6 +++++-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c b/drivers/dma-
buf/dma-fence-array.c
index d3fbd950be94..3e07f961e2f3 100644
--- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
+++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
@@ -104,7 +104,11 @@ static bool dma_fence_array_signaled(struct
dma_fence *fence)
{
struct dma_fence_array *array = to_dma_fence_array(fence);
- return atomic_read(&array->num_pending) <= 0;
+ if (atomic_read(&array->num_pending) > 0)
+ return false;
+
+ dma_fence_array_clear_pending_error(array);
+ return true;
}
static void dma_fence_array_release(struct dma_fence *fence)
