On 28/03/18 14:41, Daniel Vetter wrote: > The only thing that omap_gem_free_object does that might need the > magic protection of struct_mutex (of keeping all objects alive if that > lock is held, even if the last reference is gone) is the mm_list > manipulation. > > But that is already protected by the separate omapdrm->list_lock, > which means struct_mutex is an entirely internal lock for omapdrm. > Everything else is just releasing resources, which is all protected > already by the various subsystems and allocators. > > To make this even more obvious we could do an > s/dev->struct_mutex/omapdrm->gem_lock/ like I've done for udl. But > since omapdrm is a lot bigger and a lot more active I'll refrain from > that - this is better done by omapdrm developers at some suitable time > in the future. > > v2: Just auditing the code isn't enough, I actually have to remove > the now wrong locking check in omap_gem_free_object ... > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@intel.com> > Cc: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkei...@ti.com>
This version works fine. I'll pick this to omapdrm branch. Thanks! Tomi -- Texas Instruments Finland Oy, Porkkalankatu 22, 00180 Helsinki. Y-tunnus/Business ID: 0615521-4. Kotipaikka/Domicile: Helsinki _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
