On Mon, 09 Oct 2023, "Kandpal, Suraj" <[email protected]> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jani Nikula <[email protected]> >> Sent: Monday, October 9, 2023 4:07 PM >> To: Kandpal, Suraj <[email protected]>; [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/display: Free crtc_state in >> verify_crtc_state >> >> On Mon, 09 Oct 2023, Suraj Kandpal <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Free hw_crtc_state in verify_crtc_state after we are done using this >> > or else it's just a resource leak. >> >> Fixes: ? > > Cant really trace when this was introduced as this function was split from > Intel_display.c to intel_modeset_verify.c and then this is the last commit > that introduces it > df17ff62b626 drm/i915/display: split out modeset verification code > > Should I use this commit in the fixes tag?
Look into git annotate. BR, Jani. > > Regards, > Suraj Kandpal >> >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Suraj Kandpal <[email protected]> >> > --- >> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_modeset_verify.c | 5 ++++- >> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_modeset_verify.c >> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_modeset_verify.c >> > index 303eb68fec11..5e1c2c780412 100644 >> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_modeset_verify.c >> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_modeset_verify.c >> > @@ -214,7 +214,7 @@ verify_crtc_state(struct intel_atomic_state *state, >> > } >> > >> > if (!sw_crtc_state->hw.active) >> > - return; >> > + goto destroy_state; >> > >> > intel_pipe_config_sanity_check(hw_crtc_state); >> > >> > @@ -224,6 +224,9 @@ verify_crtc_state(struct intel_atomic_state *state, >> > intel_crtc_state_dump(hw_crtc_state, NULL, "hw state"); >> > intel_crtc_state_dump(sw_crtc_state, NULL, "sw state"); >> > } >> > + >> > +destroy_state: >> > + intel_crtc_destroy_state(&crtc->base, &hw_crtc_state->uapi); >> > } >> > >> > void intel_modeset_verify_crtc(struct intel_atomic_state *state, >> >> -- >> Jani Nikula, Intel -- Jani Nikula, Intel
