Re: [PATCH] dma_resv: prime lockdep annotations

2019-09-03 Thread Koenig, Christian
Am 03.09.19 um 10:16 schrieb Daniel Vetter: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 07:53:53AM +, Koenig, Christian wrote: >> Am 22.08.19 um 08:54 schrieb Daniel Vetter: >>> Full audit of everyone: >>> >>> - i915, radeon, amdgpu should be clean per their maintainers. >>> >>> - vram helpers should be fine,

Re: [PATCH] dma_resv: prime lockdep annotations

2019-09-03 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 07:53:53AM +, Koenig, Christian wrote: > Am 22.08.19 um 08:54 schrieb Daniel Vetter: > > Full audit of everyone: > > > > - i915, radeon, amdgpu should be clean per their maintainers. > > > > - vram helpers should be fine, they don't do command submission, so > >

Re: [PATCH] dma_resv: prime lockdep annotations

2019-08-22 Thread VMware
On 8/22/19 3:36 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 3:30 PM Thomas Hellström (VMware) wrote: On 8/22/19 3:07 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: Full audit of everyone: - i915, radeon, amdgpu should be clean per their maintainers. - vram helpers should be fine, they don't do command

Re: [PATCH] dma_resv: prime lockdep annotations

2019-08-22 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 3:30 PM Thomas Hellström (VMware) wrote: > > On 8/22/19 3:07 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Full audit of everyone: > > > > - i915, radeon, amdgpu should be clean per their maintainers. > > > > - vram helpers should be fine, they don't do command submission, so > >really

Re: [PATCH] dma_resv: prime lockdep annotations

2019-08-22 Thread VMware
On 8/22/19 3:07 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: Full audit of everyone: - i915, radeon, amdgpu should be clean per their maintainers. - vram helpers should be fine, they don't do command submission, so really no business holding struct_mutex while doing copy_*_user. But I haven't checked them

[PATCH] dma_resv: prime lockdep annotations

2019-08-22 Thread Daniel Vetter
Full audit of everyone: - i915, radeon, amdgpu should be clean per their maintainers. - vram helpers should be fine, they don't do command submission, so really no business holding struct_mutex while doing copy_*_user. But I haven't checked them all. - panfrost seems to dma_resv_lock only

Re: [PATCH] dma_resv: prime lockdep annotations

2019-08-22 Thread Rob Herring
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 1:55 AM Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Full audit of everyone: > > - i915, radeon, amdgpu should be clean per their maintainers. > > - vram helpers should be fine, they don't do command submission, so > really no business holding struct_mutex while doing copy_*_user. But > I

Re: [PATCH] dma_resv: prime lockdep annotations

2019-08-22 Thread Koenig, Christian
Am 22.08.19 um 08:54 schrieb Daniel Vetter: > Full audit of everyone: > > - i915, radeon, amdgpu should be clean per their maintainers. > > - vram helpers should be fine, they don't do command submission, so >really no business holding struct_mutex while doing copy_*_user. But >I haven't

Re: [PATCH] dma_resv: prime lockdep annotations

2019-08-22 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Daniel Vetter (2019-08-22 07:54:57) > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LOCKDEP) > +static void dma_resv_lockdep(void) > +{ > + struct mm_struct *mm = mm_alloc(); > + struct dma_resv obj; > + > + if (!mm) > + return; > + > + dma_resv_init(); > + > +

[PATCH] dma_resv: prime lockdep annotations

2019-08-22 Thread Daniel Vetter
Full audit of everyone: - i915, radeon, amdgpu should be clean per their maintainers. - vram helpers should be fine, they don't do command submission, so really no business holding struct_mutex while doing copy_*_user. But I haven't checked them all. - panfrost seems to dma_resv_lock only