Commit 9f1feed2 authored by Ben Skeggs's avatar Ben Skeggs Committed by Dave Airlie

drm/ttm: fix two regressions since move_notify changes

Both changes in dc97b340 cause serious
regressions in the nouveau driver.

move_notify() was originally able to presume that bo->mem is the old node,
and new_mem is the new node.  The above commit moves the call to
move_notify() to after move() has been done, which means that now, sometimes,
new_mem isn't the new node at all, bo->mem is, and new_mem points at a
stale, possibly-just-been-killed-by-move node.

This is clearly not a good situation.  This patch reverts this change, and
replaces it with a cleanup in the move() failure path instead.

The second issue is that the call to move_notify() from cleanup_memtype_use()
causes the TTM ghost objects to get passed into the driver.  This is clearly
bad as the driver knows nothing about these "fake" TTM BOs, and ends up
accessing uninitialised memory.

I worked around this in nouveau's move_notify() hook by ensuring the BO
destructor was nouveau's.  I don't particularly like this solution, and
would rather TTM never pass the driver these objects.  However, I don't
clearly understand the reason why we're calling move_notify() here anyway
and am happy to work around the problem in nouveau instead of breaking the
behaviour expected by other drivers.
Signed-off-by: default avatarBen Skeggs <bskeggs@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarThomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@vmware.com>
Cc: Jerome Glisse <j.glisse@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>
parent 9fc04b50
......@@ -812,6 +812,10 @@ nouveau_bo_move_ntfy(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo, struct ttm_mem_reg *new_mem)
struct nouveau_bo *nvbo = nouveau_bo(bo);
struct nouveau_vma *vma;
/* ttm can now (stupidly) pass the driver bos it didn't create... */
if (bo->destroy != nouveau_bo_del_ttm)
return;
list_for_each_entry(vma, &nvbo->vma_list, head) {
if (new_mem && new_mem->mem_type == TTM_PL_VRAM) {
nouveau_vm_map(vma, new_mem->mm_node);
......
......@@ -404,6 +404,9 @@ static int ttm_bo_handle_move_mem(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo,
}
}
if (bdev->driver->move_notify)
bdev->driver->move_notify(bo, mem);
if (!(old_man->flags & TTM_MEMTYPE_FLAG_FIXED) &&
!(new_man->flags & TTM_MEMTYPE_FLAG_FIXED))
ret = ttm_bo_move_ttm(bo, evict, no_wait_reserve, no_wait_gpu, mem);
......@@ -413,11 +416,17 @@ static int ttm_bo_handle_move_mem(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo,
else
ret = ttm_bo_move_memcpy(bo, evict, no_wait_reserve, no_wait_gpu, mem);
if (ret)
goto out_err;
if (ret) {
if (bdev->driver->move_notify) {
struct ttm_mem_reg tmp_mem = *mem;
*mem = bo->mem;
bo->mem = tmp_mem;
bdev->driver->move_notify(bo, mem);
bo->mem = *mem;
}
if (bdev->driver->move_notify)
bdev->driver->move_notify(bo, mem);
goto out_err;
}
moved:
if (bo->evicted) {
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment