On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 01:06:34PM +0100, Christian König wrote: > Calling dma_resv_add_excl_fence() with the fence as NULL and expecting > that that this frees up the fences is simply abuse of the internals of > the dma_resv object. > > v2: drop the fence pruning completely. > > Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx> Cursory look says you got them all, and it's definitely the right thing to do. Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c | 3 +-- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c > index ff3c0558b3b8..4deea75c0b9c 100644 > --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c > +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c > @@ -305,8 +305,7 @@ void dma_resv_add_excl_fence(struct dma_resv *obj, struct dma_fence *fence) > if (old) > i = old->shared_count; > > - if (fence) > - dma_fence_get(fence); > + dma_fence_get(fence); > > write_seqcount_begin(&obj->seq); > /* write_seqcount_begin provides the necessary memory barrier */ > -- > 2.25.1 > -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch
