On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 03:13:14PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > remap_pfn_range() has a nasty surprise if you try to handle two faults > from the same vma concurrently: that is the second thread hits a BUG() > to assert that the range is clear. As we hold our struct_mutex whilst > manipulating the GTT, we have an opportunity to check ahead of time > whether a second thread already processed the pagefault for us. We also > have to take care of cleaning up the VMA should remap_pfn_range() > encounter an error (likely ENOMEM) partway through processing the PTE. > > Fixes potential BUG from > > commit c5158fabeaf53ed2c614c3333aaa4b3cce80f500 > Author: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Tue Jun 10 12:14:41 2014 +0100 > > Testcase: igt/gem_mmap_gtt/wip Testcase: igt/gem_mmap_gtt/fault_concurrent -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
