Hi Krzysztof,
one error here that I also missed in the previous versions:
> @@ -1159,6 +1159,7 @@ static int __igt_mmap_migrate(struct
> intel_memory_region **placements,
> struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj;
> struct i915_request *rq = NULL;
> struct vm_area_struct *area;
> + struct file *mock_file;
> unsigned long addr;
> LIST_HEAD(objects);
> u64 offset;
> @@ -1178,13 +1179,22 @@ static int __igt_mmap_migrate(struct
> intel_memory_region **placements,
> goto out_put;
>
> /*
> - * This will eventually create a GEM context, due to opening dummy drm
> - * file, which needs a tiny amount of mappable device memory for the top
> - * level paging structures(and perhaps scratch), so make sure we
> - * allocate early, to avoid tears.
> + * Pretend to open("/dev/dri/card0"), which will eventually create a GEM
> + * context along with multiple GEM objects (for paging structures and
> + * scratch) that are placed in mappable portion of GPU memory.
> + * Calling fput() on the file places objects' cleanup routines in
> delayed
> + * worqueues, which execute after unspecified amount of time.
> + * Keep the file open until migration and page fault checks are done to
> + * make sure object cleanup is not executed after igt_fill_mappable()
> + * finishes and before migration is attempted - that would leave a gap
> + * large enough for the migration to succeed, when we'd expect it to
> fail.
> */
> - addr = igt_mmap_offset(i915, offset, obj->base.size,
> - PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED);
> + mock_file = mock_drm_getfile(i915->drm.primary, O_RDWR);
> + if (IS_ERR(mock_file))
> + return PTR_ERR(mock_file);
> +
> + addr = igt_mmap_offset_with_file(i915, offset, obj->base.size,
> + PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, mock_file);
> if (IS_ERR_VALUE(addr)) {
> err = addr;
> goto out_put;
> @@ -1295,6 +1305,7 @@ static int __igt_mmap_migrate(struct
> intel_memory_region **placements,
> vm_munmap(addr, obj->base.size);
>
> out_put:
> + fput(mock_file);
Please place fput() in a different label as the first time it's
called the mock_file is not initialized yet.
Other than this, I don't want to hold this fix any further and I
think I'm going to ack the next patch.
Chris, do you have any more inputs here?
Thanks,
Andi
