On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 03:07:35PM -0400, Lyude Paul wrote: > This one's easy - we're already calling kzalloc() in this function, so
Nit: "kzalloc(GFP_KERNEL)", since kzalloc(GFP_ATOMIC) is perfectly fine in interrupt context. With that clarified for the entire series: Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch> > we must already be guaranteed to have IRQs enabled when calling this. > So, use the plain _irq() variants of spin_(un)lock() to make this more > obvious. > > Signed-off-by: Lyude Paul <ly...@redhat.com> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <dan...@ffwll.ch> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c | 7 +++---- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c > index 51f2e988205e7..64610070ba473 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_vblank.c > @@ -1611,7 +1611,6 @@ static int drm_queue_vblank_event(struct drm_device > *dev, unsigned int pipe, > struct drm_vblank_crtc *vblank = &dev->vblank[pipe]; > struct drm_pending_vblank_event *e; > ktime_t now; > - unsigned long flags; > u64 seq; > int ret; > > @@ -1633,7 +1632,7 @@ static int drm_queue_vblank_event(struct drm_device > *dev, unsigned int pipe, > e->event.vbl.crtc_id = crtc->base.id; > } > > - spin_lock_irqsave(&dev->event_lock, flags); > + spin_lock_irq(&dev->event_lock); > > /* > * drm_crtc_vblank_off() might have been called after we called > @@ -1670,12 +1669,12 @@ static int drm_queue_vblank_event(struct drm_device > *dev, unsigned int pipe, > vblwait->reply.sequence = req_seq; > } > > - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev->event_lock, flags); > + spin_unlock_irq(&dev->event_lock); > > return 0; > > err_unlock: > - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev->event_lock, flags); > + spin_unlock_irq(&dev->event_lock); > kfree(e); > err_put: > drm_vblank_put(dev, pipe); > -- > 2.26.2 > -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch
