On 09/10/2015 11:25 AM, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
+ + active = false; + if (pinned < 0) + ret = pinned; + else if (pinned < num_pages) + ret = __i915_gem_userptr_get_pages_schedule(obj, &active); + else ret = __i915_gem_userptr_set_pages(obj, pvec, num_pages); - if (ret == 0) { - obj->userptr.work = NULL; - pinned = 0; - } + if (ret) { + __i915_gem_userptr_set_active(obj, active); + release_pages(pvec, pinned, 0);I think it would be safer to set pinned to zero in the pinned < 0 case, rather than rely on release_pages implementation knowledge. Otherwise it is too fragile. If you can put that back you can put my R-B on the patch.
Or possibly even better: if (pinned >= 0) release_pages(...); ? Tvrtko _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
