On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 01:37:27PM +0200, Christian König wrote:
No need to actually allocate an array of fences here.
Signed-off-by: Christian König christian.koenig@amd.com
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c | 26 +++++--------------------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c index 6b15cad78de9..e42dd79ed6f4 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c @@ -2090,30 +2090,14 @@ static void amdgpu_vm_free_mapping(struct amdgpu_device *adev, static void amdgpu_vm_prt_fini(struct amdgpu_device *adev, struct amdgpu_vm *vm) { struct dma_resv *resv = vm->root.bo->tbo.base.resv;
- struct dma_fence *excl, **shared;
- unsigned i, shared_count;
- int r;
- struct dma_resv_iter cursor;
- struct dma_fence *fence;
- r = dma_resv_get_fences(resv, &excl, &shared_count, &shared);
- if (r) {
/* Not enough memory to grab the fence list, as last resort* block for all the fences to complete.*/dma_resv_wait_timeout(resv, true, false,MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT);return;- }
- /* Add a callback for each fence in the reservation object */
- amdgpu_vm_prt_get(adev);
I was confused for a bit why the old code wouldn't leak a refcount for !excl case, but it's all handled.
Not sure amdgpu_vm_add_prt_cb still needs to handle the !fence case, it's a bit a gotcha but I guess can happen?
Either way, looks correct.
Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch
- amdgpu_vm_add_prt_cb(adev, excl);
- for (i = 0; i < shared_count; ++i) {
- dma_resv_for_each_fence(&cursor, resv, true, fence) {
/* Add a callback for each fence in the reservation object */
amdgpu_vm_add_prt_cb(adev, shared[i]);
amdgpu_vm_add_prt_cb(adev, fence);
- kfree(shared);
} /** -- 2.25.1