On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 10:53:42AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 10:27:48AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote: > > From: Thierry Reding <treding at nvidia.com> > > > > Drop a reference instead of directly calling the framebuffer .destroy() > > callback at fbdev free time. This is necessary to make sure the object > > isn't destroyed if anyone else still has a reference. > > > > Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding at nvidia.com> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/fb.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/fb.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/fb.c > > index c5fa3c4b2ed5..17a29971a7ee 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/fb.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/fb.c > > @@ -355,7 +355,7 @@ static void tegra_fbdev_free(struct tegra_fbdev *fbdev) > > > > if (fbdev->fb) { > > drm_framebuffer_unregister_private(&fbdev->fb->base); > > - tegra_fb_destroy(&fbdev->fb->base); > > + drm_framebuffer_unreference(&fbdev->fb->base); > > Yeah this is better since you have a free-standing fb pointer. I think > most kms drivers copied this stuff from i915, which just embedded the > framebuffer. And then calling unref obviously is a bad idea since the > kfree will blow up. > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch>
I just noticed that drm_framebuffer_remove() is actually more appropriate here. Just unreferencing will trigger the WARN_ON in drm_mode_config_cleanup(). Removing the framebuffer also has the advantage that any users are forcibly disabled, which gets rid of some annoying IOMMU faults. Does the Reviewed-by still apply if I do this on top: - drm_framebuffer_unreference(&fbdev->fb->base); + drm_framebuffer_remove(&fbdev->fb->base); ? Thierry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/attachments/20141104/8a9bfc0b/attachment.sig>