On to, 2016-06-09 at 14:35 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 04:06:59PM +0300, Joonas Lahtinen wrote: > > > > On to, 2016-06-09 at 12:29 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > > > > There is an improbable, but not impossible, case that if we leave the > > > pages unpin as we operate on the object, then somebody may steal the > > > lock and change the cache domains after we have already inspected them. > > > > > Which lock exactly? > The shrinker steals struct_mutex from underneath us. The guard is > pinning pages around operating on the object. Wouldn't the race scenario I described then apply (between get_pages and pin_pages)? > -Chris > -- Joonas Lahtinen Open Source Technology Center Intel Corporation _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
