Am 29.11.21 um 13:23 schrieb Thomas Hellström:
Hi, Christian,
On Mon, 2021-11-29 at 09:21 +0100, Christian König wrote:
Am 29.11.21 um 08:35 schrieb Thomas Hellström:
If a dma_fence_array is reported signaled by a call to dma_fence_is_signaled(), it may leak the PENDING_ERROR status.
Fix this by clearing the PENDING_ERROR status if we return true in dma_fence_array_signaled().
Fixes: 1f70b8b812f3 ("dma-fence: Propagate errors to dma-fence- array container") Cc: linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org Cc: Christian König ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com Cc: Chris Wilson chris@chris-wilson.co.uk Signed-off-by: Thomas Hellström thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com
Reviewed-by: Christian König christian.koenig@amd.com
How are the dma-buf / dma-fence patches typically merged? If i915 is the only fence->error user, could we take this through drm-intel to avoid a backmerge for upcoming i915 work?
Well that one here looks like a bugfix to me, so either through drm-misc-fixes ore some i915 -fixes branch sounds fine to me.
If you have any new development based on that a backmerge of the -fixes into your -next branch is unavoidable anyway.
Regards, Christian.
/Thomas
drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c | 6 +++++- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c b/drivers/dma- buf/dma-fence-array.c index d3fbd950be94..3e07f961e2f3 100644 --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c @@ -104,7 +104,11 @@ static bool dma_fence_array_signaled(struct dma_fence *fence) { struct dma_fence_array *array = to_dma_fence_array(fence); - return atomic_read(&array->num_pending) <= 0; + if (atomic_read(&array->num_pending) > 0) + return false;
+ dma_fence_array_clear_pending_error(array); + return true; } static void dma_fence_array_release(struct dma_fence *fence)