Good catch!
Reviewed-by: Martin Krastev <martin.krastev@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Regards,
Martin
On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 11:07 PM Ian Forbes <ian.forbes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Legacy DU was broken by the referenced fixes commit because the placement
> and the busy_placement no longer pointed to the same object. This was later
> fixed indirectly by commit a78a8da51b36c7a0c0c16233f91d60aac03a5a49
> ("drm/ttm: replace busy placement with flags v6") in v6.9.
>
> Fixes: 39985eea5a6d ("drm/vmwgfx: Abstract placement selection")
> Signed-off-by: Ian Forbes <ian.forbes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # v6.4+
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_bo.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_bo.c
> index 2bfac3aad7b7..98e73eb0ccf1 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_bo.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_bo.c
> @@ -204,6 +204,7 @@ int vmw_bo_pin_in_start_of_vram(struct vmw_private *dev_priv,
> VMW_BO_DOMAIN_VRAM,
> VMW_BO_DOMAIN_VRAM);
> buf->places[0].lpfn = PFN_UP(bo->resource->size);
> + buf->busy_places[0].lpfn = PFN_UP(bo->resource->size);
> ret = ttm_bo_validate(bo, &buf->placement, &ctx);
>
> /* For some reason we didn't end up at the start of vram */
> --
> 2.34.1
>
