Jerome Glisse wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > I think we should not ttm_bo_unreserve the bo in > ttm_bo_move_accel_cleanup i am seeing double unreserve > which likely lead to kernel list corruption and i > think it's due to that one (i am checking through > printk but the log is enormous and my script is not > yet done with parsing it) > > I checked code path in via using ttm_bo_move_accel_cleanup > and none seems to reserve the buffer before calling > ttm_bo_move_accel_cleanup. > > Jerome,
All buffers that are touched by the move code need to be reserved. What happens in the above case is that the buffer is copied in its reserved state, and thus there will be an unreserve for each copy. Please make sure, however, that you got all of the buffer_object_transfer fixes from the newttm branch, in particular the one where we clear the fbo->swap list head. /Thomas > (Btw my tree is in my fdo drm-next repo drm-next-radeon > branch i think they are few more fixes you might have > miss but i will do a diff latter and push to mesa/drm > repo) > > Cheers, > Jerome > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by: High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment. Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
