Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2020-03-12 14:18:26) > > On 12/03/2020 11:53, Chris Wilson wrote: > > During driver unload, we have many asserts that we have released our > > bookkeeping structs and are idle. In some cases, these struct are > > protected by RCU and we do not release them until after an RCU grace > > period. > > > > Reported-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankho...@linux.intel.com> > > Fixes: 130a95e9098e ("drm/i915/gem: Consolidate ctx->engines[] release") > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> > > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com> > > Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuopp...@linux.intel.com> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c | 3 +++ > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c > > index 3dea8881e915..d09f7596cb98 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c > > @@ -667,6 +667,9 @@ void intel_gt_driver_release(struct intel_gt *gt) > > > > void intel_gt_driver_late_release(struct intel_gt *gt) > > { > > + /* We need to wait for inflight RCU frees to release their grip */ > > + rcu_barrier(); > > + > > intel_uc_driver_late_release(>->uc); > > intel_gt_fini_requests(gt); > > intel_gt_fini_reset(gt); > > > > Not sure if GT or GEM is the place, but liberal application seems > required anyway nowadays. > > Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>
Either after gem_fini_contexts or before here, both have reasonable arguments. One being the point of assertion, the other the point of expected release. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx