Skip to content

K
Kernel

openeuler / Kernel
1 年多 前同步成功

通知 8
Star 0
Fork 0
K
Kernel
切换分支/标签
  1. 02 6月, 2016 6 次提交
  3. 01 6月, 2016 3 次提交
    • D
      drm/i915: Revert async unpin and nonblocking atomic commit · e42aeef1
      由 Daniel Vetter 提交于 
      This reverts the following patches:

d55dbd06 drm/i915: Allow nonblocking update of pageflips.
15c86bdb drm/i915: Check for unpin correctness.
95c2ccdc Reapply "drm/i915: Avoid stalling on pending flips for legacy cursor updates"
a6747b73 drm/i915: Make unpin async.
03f476e1 drm/i915: Prepare connectors for nonblocking checks.
2099deff drm/i915: Pass atomic states to fbc update functions.
ee7171af drm/i915: Remove reset_counter from intel_crtc.
2ee004f7 drm/i915: Remove queue_flip pointer.
b8d2afae drm/i915: Remove use_mmio_flip kernel parameter.
8dd634d9 drm/i915: Remove cs based page flip support.
143f73b3 drm/i915: Rework intel_crtc_page_flip to be almost atomic, v3.
84fc494b drm/i915: Add the exclusive fence to plane_state.
6885843a drm/i915: Convert flip_work to a list.
aa420ddd drm/i915: Allow mmio updates on all platforms, v2.
afee4d87 Revert "drm/i915: Avoid stalling on pending flips for legacy cursor updates"

"drm/i915: Allow nonblocking update of pageflips" should have been
split up, misses a proper commit message and seems to cause issues in
the legacy page_flip path as demonstrated by kms_flip.

"drm/i915: Make unpin async" doesn't handle the unthrottled cursor
updates correctly, leading to an apparent pin count leak. This is
caught by the WARN_ON in i915_gem_object_do_pin which screams if we
have more than DRM_I915_GEM_OBJECT_MAX_PIN_COUNT pins.

Unfortuantely we can't just revert these two because this patch series
came with a built-in bisect breakage in the form of temporarily
removing the unthrottled cursor update hack for legacy cursor ioctl.
Therefore there's no other option than to revert the entire pile :(

There's one tiny conflict in intel_drv.h due to other patches, nothing
serious.

Normally I'd wait a bit longer with doing a maintainer revert, but
since the minimal set of patches we need to revert (due to the bisect
breakage) is so big, time is running out fast. And very soon
(especially after a few attempts at fixing issues) it'll be really
hard to revert things cleanly.

Lessons learned:
- Not a good idea to rush the review (done by someone fairly new to
  the area) and not make sure domain experts had a chance to read it.

- Patches should be properly split up. I only looked at the two
  patches that should be reverted in detail, but both look like the
  mix up different things in one patch.

- Patches really should have proper commit messages. Especially when
  doing more than one thing, and especially when touching critical and
  tricky core code.

- Building a patch series and r-b stamping it when it has a built-in
  bisect breakage is not a good idea.

- I also think we need to stop building up technical debt by
  postponing atomic igt testcases even longer. I think it's clear that
  there's enough corner cases in this beast that we really need to
  have the testcases _before_ the next step lands.

(cherry picked from commit 5a21b665
from drm-intel-next-queeud)

Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Patrik Jakobsson <patrik.jakobsson@linux.intel.com>
Cc: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Acked-by: NMaarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: NVille Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: NDave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>
Acked-by: NJani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: NDaniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
      e42aeef1
    • D
      drm/vc4: Use lockless gem BO free callback · b82caafc
      由 Daniel Vetter 提交于 
      No dev->struct_mutex anywhere to be seen.

Cc: Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net>
Reviewed-by: NEric Anholt <eric@anholt.net>
Signed-off-by: NDaniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/1464630800-30786-16-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch
      b82caafc
    • D
      drm/vc4: Use drm_gem_object_unreference_unlocked · db369729
      由 Daniel Vetter 提交于 
      Since my last struct_mutex crusade someone escaped!

This already has the advantage that for the common case when someone
else holds a ref the unref won't even acquire dev->struct_mutex. And
I'm working on code to allow drivers to completely opt-out of any and
all dev->struct_mutex usage, but that only works if they use the
_unlocked variants everywhere.

v2: Drop comment too.

v3: Drop the other comment too.

Cc: Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net>
Reviewed-by: NEric Anholt <eric@anholt.net>
Signed-off-by: NDaniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/1464630800-30786-15-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch
      db369729
  5. 31 5月, 2016 11 次提交
  7. 30 5月, 2016 3 次提交
  9. 28 5月, 2016 1 次提交
    • A
      remove lots of IS_ERR_VALUE abuses · 287980e4
      由 Arnd Bergmann 提交于 
      Most users of IS_ERR_VALUE() in the kernel are wrong, as they
pass an 'int' into a function that takes an 'unsigned long'
argument. This happens to work because the type is sign-extended
on 64-bit architectures before it gets converted into an
unsigned type.

However, anything that passes an 'unsigned short' or 'unsigned int'
argument into IS_ERR_VALUE() is guaranteed to be broken, as are
8-bit integers and types that are wider than 'unsigned long'.

Andrzej Hajda has already fixed a lot of the worst abusers that
were causing actual bugs, but it would be nice to prevent any
users that are not passing 'unsigned long' arguments.

This patch changes all users of IS_ERR_VALUE() that I could find
on 32-bit ARM randconfig builds and x86 allmodconfig. For the
moment, this doesn't change the definition of IS_ERR_VALUE()
because there are probably still architecture specific users
elsewhere.

Almost all the warnings I got are for files that are better off
using 'if (err)' or 'if (err < 0)'.
The only legitimate user I could find that we get a warning for
is the (32-bit only) freescale fman driver, so I did not remove
the IS_ERR_VALUE() there but changed the type to 'unsigned long'.
For 9pfs, I just worked around one user whose calling conventions
are so obscure that I did not dare change the behavior.

I was using this definition for testing:

 #define IS_ERR_VALUE(x) ((unsigned long*)NULL == (typeof (x)*)NULL && \
       unlikely((unsigned long long)(x) >= (unsigned long long)(typeof(x))-MAX_ERRNO))

which ends up making all 16-bit or wider types work correctly with
the most plausible interpretation of what IS_ERR_VALUE() was supposed
to return according to its users, but also causes a compile-time
warning for any users that do not pass an 'unsigned long' argument.

I suggested this approach earlier this year, but back then we ended
up deciding to just fix the users that are obviously broken. After
the initial warning that caused me to get involved in the discussion
(fs/gfs2/dir.c) showed up again in the mainline kernel, Linus
asked me to send the whole thing again.

[ Updated the 9p parts as per Al Viro  - Linus ]
Signed-off-by: NArnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/1/7/363
Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/5/27/486
Acked-by: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> # For nvmem part
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      287980e4
  11. 25 5月, 2016 4 次提交
  13. 24 5月, 2016 3 次提交
  15. 23 5月, 2016 9 次提交