On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 08:32:07AM -0800, Rob Clark wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 6:01 AM Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 11:40:01AM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 11:01:46AM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 03:13:30PM
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 6:01 AM Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 11:40:01AM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 11:01:46AM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 03:13:30PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > > > If a process is interrupted while
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 11:40:01AM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 11:01:46AM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 03:13:30PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > > If a process is interrupted while accessing the "gpu" debugfs file and
> > > the drm device
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 11:01:46AM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 03:13:30PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > If a process is interrupted while accessing the "gpu" debugfs file and
> > the drm device struct_mutex is contended, release() could return early
> > and fail to free
On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 03:13:30PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> If a process is interrupted while accessing the "gpu" debugfs file and
> the drm device struct_mutex is contended, release() could return early
> and fail to free related resources.
>
> Note that the return value from release() is
