On Wed, Sep 04, 2019 at 04:10:30PM -0700, Chia-I Wu wrote:
On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 12:48 AM Gerd Hoffmann kraxel@redhat.com wrote:
Only call virtio_gpu_array_add_fence if we actually have a fence.
Fixes: da758d51968a ("drm/virtio: rework virtio_gpu_execbuffer_ioctl fencing") Signed-off-by: Gerd Hoffmann kraxel@redhat.com
drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_vq.c | 9 +++++---- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_vq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_vq.c index 595fa6ec2d58..7fd2851f7b97 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_vq.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_vq.c @@ -339,11 +339,12 @@ static void virtio_gpu_queue_fenced_ctrl_buffer(struct virtio_gpu_device *vgdev, goto again; }
if (fence)
if (fence) { virtio_gpu_fence_emit(vgdev, hdr, fence);
if (vbuf->objs) {virtio_gpu_array_add_fence(vbuf->objs, &fence->f);virtio_gpu_array_unlock_resv(vbuf->objs);
if (vbuf->objs) {virtio_gpu_array_add_fence(vbuf->objs, &fence->f);virtio_gpu_array_unlock_resv(vbuf->objs);}This leaks when fence == NULL and vbuf->objs != NULL (which can really happen IIRC... not at my desk to check).
Yes, it can happen, for example when flushing dumb buffers.
But I don't think we leak in this case. The code paths which don't need a fence also do not call virtio_gpu_array_lock_resv(), so things are balanced. The actual release of the objs happens in virtio_gpu_dequeue_ctrl_func() via virtio_gpu_array_put_free_delayed().
cheers, Gerd