It's not necessary to unpin buffer in fb destruction. pin/unpin
need to be balanced and we don't pin in fb creation. We pin when
an fb is associated to a crtc and unpin when the fb is disassociated
from the crtc.
Note:
Maybe we should take reference on fb in set_base callback so fb
doesn't disappear until it's unbind from ctrc.
Signed-off-by: Jerome Glisse <jgli...@redhat.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_display.c | 1 -
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_display.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_display.c
index 0ec491e..3ff34a9 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_display.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_display.c
@@ -667,7 +667,6 @@ static void radeon_user_framebuffer_destroy(struct
drm_framebuffer *fb)
radeonfb_remove(dev, fb);
if (radeon_fb->obj) {
- radeon_gem_object_unpin(radeon_fb->obj);
mutex_lock(&dev->struct_mutex);
drm_gem_object_unreference(radeon_fb->obj);
mutex_unlock(&dev->struct_mutex);
--
1.6.5.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community
Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support
A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy
Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers
http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev
--
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
Dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
