Hi, On Mon, 9 Sep 2019 from Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Hmm, I think the patch is wrong. As far I know it is the qxl drivers's > job to call ttm_eu_backoff_reservation(). Doing that automatically in > ttm will most likely break other ttm users. > Perhaps. >So I guess the call is missing in the qxl driver somewhere, most likely >in some error handling code path given that this bug is a relatively >rare event. > >There is only a single ttm_eu_reserve_buffers() call in qxl. >So how about this? > No preference in either way if it is a right cure. BTW a quick peep at the mainline tree shows not every ttm_eu_reserve_buffers() pairs with ttm_eu_backoff_reservation() without qxl being taken in account. Hillf |
_______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
