Am 13.04.22 um 10:44 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 09:21:33AM +0100, Matthew Auld wrote:
It looks like we still need to call dma_fence_put() on the man->move, otherwise we just end up leaking it, leading to fireworks later.
Closes: https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgitlab.fre... Fixes: 8bb31587820a ("drm/ttm: remove bo->moving") Cc: Christian König christian.koenig@amd.com Cc: Daniel Vetter daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld matthew.auld@intel.com
drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c index 015a94f766de..b15b77e10383 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c @@ -744,6 +744,8 @@ static int ttm_bo_add_move_fence(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo, dma_fence_put(fence); return ret; }
- dma_fence_put(fence);
Please delete the above if () and simplify the function tail to
dma_fence_put(fence); return ret;
With that Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch
And thanks a lot for catching this, I guess I get a prize for most useless review ever :-/ Hopefully this one here is better.
Well so far we one inversion of min/max, one missing put and the incorrect handling of the return code in i915.
Considering how complex the patches have been I think we are still pretty good.
Christian.
-Daniel
return 0; }
-- 2.34.1