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
