On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 01:31:35PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 02:17:24PM +0200, [email protected] wrote: > > From: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]> > > > > Point crtc->fb the the new framebuffer only after we know that the flip > > was succesfully queued. > > > > While at it, move the intel_fb and obj assignments a bit close to where > > they're used. > > > > Cc: [email protected] > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]> > > Hmm, that exposes us to a FlipDone interrupt seeing the old crtc->fb. > That looks safe enough, but can you see how ugly restoring the old_fb > looks in comparison?
I don't think anyone should be poking at crtc->fb w/o holding the crtc mutex. Except that intel_update_fbc() actually does. That thing would appear to be just broken since it crawls around in the crtc state w/o proper protection. The fb could even disappear from under it. But if you prefer the set/restore approach I'll send out a version doing that. -- Ville Syrjälä Intel OTC -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
