On Tue, 2026-07-14 at 09:53 +0200, Philipp Stanner wrote:
> On Mon, 2026-07-13 at 10:58 +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 20. 01. 26, 11:54, Christian König wrote:
> > > Some driver use fence->ops to test if a fence was initialized or not.
> > > The problem is that this utilizes internal behavior of the dma_fence
> > > implementation.
> > >
> > > So better abstract that into a function.
> > >
> > > v2: use a flag instead of testing fence->ops, rename the function, move
> > > to the beginning of the patch set.
> > ...
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_release.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/qxl/qxl_release.c
> > > @@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ qxl_release_free(struct qxl_device *qdev,
> > > idr_remove(&qdev->release_idr, release->id);
> > > spin_unlock(&qdev->release_idr_lock);
> > >
> > > - if (release->base.ops) {
> > > + if (dma_fence_was_initialized(&release->base)) {
>
> Could you verify the cause with sth like
>
> if (release->base.ops && dma_fence_was_initialized(…)) {
Forget about that, probably would not work or cause other issues
because the NULL-setting on signal().
I'd then probably try to verify it with a separate boolean in struct
release. Though I also don't get why the fence-initialized check does
not do the trick.
P.
