Hi Ville,
On 12 November 2015 at 16:52, <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Let's name our planes in a way that makes sense wrt. the spec:
> - skl+ -> "plane 1A", "plane 2A", "plane 1C", "cursor A" etc.
> - g4x+ -> "primary A", "primary B", "sprite A", "cursor C" etc.
> - pre-g4x -> "plane A", "cursor B" etc.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sprite.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> index 2b5e81a..82b2f58 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
> @@ -13788,7 +13788,15 @@ static void intel_finish_crtc_commit(struct drm_crtc *crtc,
> void intel_plane_destroy(struct drm_plane *plane)
> {
> struct intel_plane *intel_plane = to_intel_plane(plane);
> + char *name;
> +
> + /*
> + * drm_plane_cleanup() zeroes the structure, so
> + * need an extra dance to avoid leaking the name.
> + */
> + name = plane->name;
> drm_plane_cleanup(plane);
> + kfree(name);
> kfree(intel_plane);
> }
>
> @@ -13838,6 +13846,21 @@ static struct drm_plane *intel_primary_plane_create(struct drm_device *dev,
> if (HAS_FBC(dev) && INTEL_INFO(dev)->gen < 4)
> primary->plane = !pipe;
>
> + if (INTEL_INFO(dev)->gen >= 9)
> + primary->base.name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "plane 1%c",
> + pipe_name(pipe));
> + else if (INTEL_INFO(dev)->gen >= 5 || IS_G4X(dev))
> + primary->base.name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "primary %c",
> + pipe_name(pipe));
> + else
> + primary->base.name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "plane %c",
> + plane_name(primary->plane));
> + if (!primary->base.name) {
> + kfree(state);
> + kfree(primary);
> + return NULL;
Worth adding a label and doing all the teardown there ? (same goes for
the rest of the patch)
> + }
> +
> if (INTEL_INFO(dev)->gen >= 9) {
> intel_primary_formats = skl_primary_formats;
> num_formats = ARRAY_SIZE(skl_primary_formats);
> @@ -13987,6 +14010,14 @@ static struct drm_plane *intel_cursor_plane_create(struct drm_device *dev,
> cursor->commit_plane = intel_commit_cursor_plane;
> cursor->disable_plane = intel_disable_cursor_plane;
>
> + cursor->base.name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "cursor %c",
> + pipe_name(pipe));
> + if (!cursor->base.name) {
> + kfree(state);
> + kfree(cursor);
> + return NULL;
> + }
> +
> drm_universal_plane_init(dev, &cursor->base, 0,
> &intel_plane_funcs,
> intel_cursor_formats,
> @@ -14113,9 +14144,9 @@ static void intel_crtc_init(struct drm_device *dev, int pipe)
>
> fail:
> if (primary)
> - drm_plane_cleanup(primary);
> + intel_plane_destroy(primary);
> if (cursor)
> - drm_plane_cleanup(cursor);
> + intel_plane_destroy(cursor);
Something feels strange here. We are either leaking memory before or
we'll end up with double free after your patch. Worth
checking/mentioning in the commit message ?
Regards,
Emil
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
