From 68c84342171034120c8a1f6dfb8ef51b14250f11 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Shaohua Li Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 10:58:23 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] drm/i915: fix scheduling while holding the new active list spinlock regression caused by commit 5e118f4139feafe97e913df67b1f7c1e5083e535: i915_gem_object_move_to_inactive() should be called in task context, as it calls fput(); Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li [anholt: Add more detail to the comment about the lock break that's added] Signed-off-by: Eric Anholt --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 13 ++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c index 6dca9fc7c1db..4642115902d6 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c @@ -1596,8 +1596,19 @@ i915_gem_retire_request(struct drm_device *dev, if (obj->write_domain != 0) i915_gem_object_move_to_flushing(obj); - else + else { + /* Take a reference on the object so it won't be + * freed while the spinlock is held. The list + * protection for this spinlock is safe when breaking + * the lock like this since the next thing we do + * is just get the head of the list again. + */ + drm_gem_object_reference(obj); i915_gem_object_move_to_inactive(obj); + spin_unlock(&dev_priv->mm.active_list_lock); + drm_gem_object_unreference(obj); + spin_lock(&dev_priv->mm.active_list_lock); + } } out: spin_unlock(&dev_priv->mm.active_list_lock); -- GitLab