On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 11:32:02AM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <[email protected]> > --- > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h > index b13c5526a73b..7aaf8eddf19c 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h > @@ -2146,14 +2146,14 @@ i915_gem_request_unreference(struct > drm_i915_gem_request *req) > static inline void > i915_gem_request_unreference__unlocked(struct drm_i915_gem_request *req) > { > - if (req && !atomic_add_unless(&req->ref.refcount, -1, 1)) { > - struct drm_device *dev = req->ring->dev; > + struct drm_device *dev; > + > + if (!req) > + return; > > - mutex_lock(&dev->struct_mutex); > - if (likely(atomic_dec_and_test(&req->ref.refcount))) > - i915_gem_request_free(&req->ref); > + dev = req->ring->dev; > + if (kref_put_mutex(&req->ref, i915_gem_request_free, > &dev->struct_mutex)) > mutex_unlock(&dev->struct_mutex);
We don't need this conditional unlock here since that's only possible if you have a weak reference somewhere (i.e. using kref_get_unless_zero). If the object only has strong references and you're dropping the last one it can't magically get resurrected somehow. And drm_gem_object_unreference_unlocked wants the same patch I think. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
