On Mon, 28 Jun 2021 at 15:49, Bommu Krishnaiah <krishnaiah.bo...@intel.com> wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Bommu Krishnaiah <krishnaiah.bo...@intel.com> > Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankho...@linux.intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c > index c39d982c4fa66..97093a9bfccc2 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_ttm.c > @@ -590,6 +590,7 @@ static unsigned long i915_ttm_io_mem_pfn(struct > ttm_buffer_object *bo, > GEM_WARN_ON(bo->ttm); > > sg = __i915_gem_object_get_sg(obj, &obj->ttm.get_io_page, > page_offset, &ofs, true, true); > + GEM_BUG_ON(!sg);
Is there some analysis for how this could happen? The commit message should ideally have something like that. It looks like we already have a GEM_BUG_ON(!sg) for the lookup case, and in the event of doing the manual walk we already dereference the sg, so not seeing it. > > return ((base + sg_dma_address(sg)) >> PAGE_SHIFT) + ofs; > } > -- > 2.25.1 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
