On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 06:20:01PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On 2019-10-25 6:18 p.m., Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 06:06:26PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> >> On 2019-10-25 1:04 p.m., Will Deacon wrote:
> >>> In the highly unlikely event that we fail to allocate the
On 2019-10-25 6:18 p.m., Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 06:06:26PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>> On 2019-10-25 1:04 p.m., Will Deacon wrote:
>>> In the highly unlikely event that we fail to allocate the "radeon-crtc"
>>> workqueue, we should bail cleanly rather than blindly march on
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 06:06:26PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On 2019-10-25 1:04 p.m., Will Deacon wrote:
> > In the highly unlikely event that we fail to allocate the "radeon-crtc"
> > workqueue, we should bail cleanly rather than blindly march on with a
> > NULL pointer installed for the
On 2019-10-25 1:04 p.m., Will Deacon wrote:
> In the highly unlikely event that we fail to allocate the "radeon-crtc"
> workqueue, we should bail cleanly rather than blindly march on with a
> NULL pointer installed for the 'flip_queue' field of the 'radeon_crtc'
> structure.
>
> This was reported
In the highly unlikely event that we fail to allocate the "radeon-crtc"
workqueue, we should bail cleanly rather than blindly march on with a
NULL pointer installed for the 'flip_queue' field of the 'radeon_crtc'
structure.
This was reported previously by Nicolas, but I don't think his fix was
