On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 07:50:31PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > The saga around the breadcrumb vmas used by execbuf continues ... > > This time around we've managed to unconditionally move the object to > the unbound list on the last vma unbind even though it might never > have been on either the bound or unbound list. Hilarity ensued. > > Chris Wilson tracked this one down but compared to his patches I've > simply opted to completely separate the unbound case for not-yet bound > vmas. Otherwise we imo end up with semantically hard to parse checks > around the list_move_tail(global_list, ...). > > This is exercised by the new swapping variants of > igt/tests/gem_evict_everything. > > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Ben Widawsky <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/attachment.cgi?id=84818 > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 8 +++++--- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > index d9eee14..d12dfc3 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > @@ -2624,8 +2624,11 @@ int i915_vma_unbind(struct i915_vma *vma) > if (list_empty(&vma->vma_link)) > return 0; > > - if (!drm_mm_node_allocated(&vma->node)) > - goto destroy; > + if (!drm_mm_node_allocated(&vma->node)) { > + i915_gem_vma_destroy(vma); > + I'm equivocal on this particular whitespace. For such short branches, it looks neater with a tight return. > + return 0; > + } -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
