On 13/09/2021 14:16, Christian König wrote:
This is maybe even a fix since the RCU usage here looks incorrect.
What you think is incorrect? Pointless extra rcu locking?
Also, FWIW, I submitted a patch to remove this function altogether since its IMO pretty useless, just failed in getting anyone to ack it so far.
Regards,
Tvrtko
Signed-off-by: Christian König christian.koenig@amd.com
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.h | 15 +++++++-------- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.h index e9eecebf5c9d..3343922af4d6 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.h @@ -500,16 +500,15 @@ static inline struct intel_engine_cs * i915_gem_object_last_write_engine(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj) { struct intel_engine_cs *engine = NULL;
- struct dma_resv_cursor cursor; struct dma_fence *fence;
- rcu_read_lock();
- fence = dma_resv_get_excl_unlocked(obj->base.resv);
- rcu_read_unlock();
- if (fence && dma_fence_is_i915(fence) && !dma_fence_is_signaled(fence))
engine = to_request(fence)->engine;- dma_fence_put(fence);
- dma_resv_for_each_fence_unlocked(obj->base.resv, &cursor, false,
fence) {if (fence && dma_fence_is_i915(fence) &&!dma_fence_is_signaled(fence))engine = to_request(fence)->engine;- } return engine; }