Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 07/12] drm/i915: GEM operations need to be done under the big lock

2016-02-15 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 10:13:30AM +, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 02:46:19PM +, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > From: Tvrtko Ursulin > > > > VMA creation and GEM list management need the big lock. > > > > v2: > > > > Mutex unlock ended on the wrong path somehow. (0-day, Juli

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 07/12] drm/i915: GEM operations need to be done under the big lock

2016-02-11 Thread Chris Wilson
On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 02:46:19PM +, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > From: Tvrtko Ursulin > > VMA creation and GEM list management need the big lock. > > v2: > > Mutex unlock ended on the wrong path somehow. (0-day, Julia Lawall) > > Not to mention drm_gem_object_unreference was there in existing

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 07/12] drm/i915: GEM operations need to be done under the big lock

2016-02-02 Thread Chris Wilson
On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 02:46:19PM +, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > From: Tvrtko Ursulin > > VMA creation and GEM list management need the big lock. > > v2: > > Mutex unlock ended on the wrong path somehow. (0-day, Julia Lawall) > > Not to mention drm_gem_object_unreference was there in existing

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 07/12] drm/i915: GEM operations need to be done under the big lock

2016-02-02 Thread Tvrtko Ursulin
From: Tvrtko Ursulin VMA creation and GEM list management need the big lock. v2: Mutex unlock ended on the wrong path somehow. (0-day, Julia Lawall) Not to mention drm_gem_object_unreference was there in existing code with no mutex held. v3: Some callers of i915_gem_object_create_stolen_for_