On 16/09/2020 08:42, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 05:45:09PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 23/07/2020 18:21, Chris Wilson wrote:
Since the debugfs may peek into the GEM contexts as the corresponding
client/fd is being closed, we may try and follow a dangling pointer.
Howeve
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 05:45:09PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
> On 23/07/2020 18:21, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Since the debugfs may peek into the GEM contexts as the corresponding
> > client/fd is being closed, we may try and follow a dangling pointer.
> > However, the context closure itself is
On 23/07/2020 18:21, Chris Wilson wrote:
Since the debugfs may peek into the GEM contexts as the corresponding
client/fd is being closed, we may try and follow a dangling pointer.
However, the context closure itself is serialised with the ctx->mutex,
so if we hold that mutex as we inspect the s
Hi
[This is an automated email]
This commit has been processed because it contains a -stable tag.
The stable tag indicates that it's relevant for the following trees: all
The bot has tested the following trees: v5.7.10, v5.4.53, v4.19.134, v4.14.189,
v4.9.231, v4.4.231.
v5.7.10: Build OK!
v5.4
Since the debugfs may peek into the GEM contexts as the corresponding
client/fd is being closed, we may try and follow a dangling pointer.
However, the context closure itself is serialised with the ctx->mutex,
so if we hold that mutex as we inspect the state coupled in the context,
we know the poin
