On (22/05/30 16:55), Christian König wrote: > Am 30.05.22 um 16:22 schrieb Sergey Senozhatsky: > > [SNIP] > > So the `lock` should have at least same lifespan as the DMA fence > > that borrows it, which is impossible to guarantee in our case. > > Nope, that's not correct. The lock should have at least same lifespan as the > context of the DMA fence. How does one know when it's safe to release the context? DMA fence objects are still transparently refcount-ed and "live their own lives", how does one synchronize lifespans?
