On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 8:57 PM Tang, CQ wrote:
>
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.c
> > @@ -22,6 +22,8 @@
> > *
> > */
> >
> > +#include
> > +
> > #include "display/intel_frontbuffer.h"
> > #include "gt/intel_gt.h"
> >
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object.c
> @@ -22,6 +22,8 @@
> *
> */
>
> +#include
> +
> #include "display/intel_frontbuffer.h"
> #include "gt/intel_gt.h"
> #include "i915_drv.h"
> @@ -52,6 +54,14 @@ void
Quoting Daniel Vetter (2019-11-04 19:37:18)
> The trouble with having a plain nesting flag for locks which do not
> naturally nest (unlike block devices and their partitions, which is
> the original motivation for nesting levels) is that lockdep will
> never spot a true deadlock if you screw up.
>
The trouble with having a plain nesting flag for locks which do not
naturally nest (unlike block devices and their partitions, which is
the original motivation for nesting levels) is that lockdep will
never spot a true deadlock if you screw up.
This patch is an attempt at trying better, by
Quoting Daniel Vetter (2019-08-20 09:19:49)
> +#include
> +
> #include "display/intel_frontbuffer.h"
> #include "gt/intel_gt.h"
> #include "i915_drv.h"
> @@ -51,6 +53,15 @@ void i915_gem_object_init(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
> {
> mutex_init(>mm.lock);
>
> + if
The trouble with having a plain nesting flag for locks which do not
naturally nest (unlike block devices and their partitions, which is
the original motivation for nesting levels) is that lockdep will
never spot a true deadlock if you screw up.
This patch is an attempt at trying better, by
