On Sat, Jan 2, 2021 at 12:26 PM Iskren Chernev <iskren.chernev@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> The msm_gem_get_iova should be guarded with gpu != NULL and not aspace
> != NULL, because aspace is NULL when using vram carveout.
>
> Fixes: 933415e24bd0d ("drm/msm: Add support for private address space instances")
>
> Signed-off-by: Iskren Chernev <iskren.chernev@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
> index c5e61cb3356df..c1953fb079133 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c
> @@ -775,9 +775,10 @@ static int msm_ioctl_gem_info_iova(struct drm_device *dev,
> struct drm_file *file, struct drm_gem_object *obj,
> uint64_t *iova)
> {
> + struct msm_drm_private *priv = dev->dev_private;
> struct msm_file_private *ctx = file->driver_priv;
>
> - if (!ctx->aspace)
> + if (!priv->gpu)
> return -EINVAL;
Does this actually work? It seems like you would hit a null ptr deref
in msm_gem_init_vma().. and in general I think a lot of code paths
would be surprised by a null address space, so this seems like a risky
idea.
Maybe instead we should be creating an address space for the vram carveout?
BR,
-R
> /*
> --
> 2.29.2
>
