On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 06:09:06PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: > VMAs can be created and not bound. One may think of it as lazy cleanup, > and safely gloss over the conditions which manufacture it. In either > case, when the object backing the i915 vma is destroyed, we must cleanup > the vma without stumbling into a bunch of pitfalls that assume the vma > is bound. > > NOTE: I was pretty certain the above condition could only happen when we > introduced the use of VMAs being looked up at execbuf, and already > existing. Paulo has hit this though, so I must be missing something. As > I believe the patch is correct anyway, therefore I won't scratch my head > too hard. > > v2: use goto destroy as a compromise (Chris) > > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@xxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
