Quoting Christian König (2017-09-04 14:27:33)
> From: Christian König <[email protected]>
>
> The logic is buggy and unnecessary complex. When dma_fence_get_rcu() fails to
> acquire a reference it doesn't necessary mean that there is no fence at all.
>
> It usually mean that the fence was replaced by a new one and in this situation
> we certainly want to have the new one as result and *NOT* NULL.
Which is not guaranteed by the code you wrote either.
The point of the comment is that the mb is only inside the successful
kref_atomic_inc_unless_zero, and that only after that mb do you know
whether or not you have the current fence.
You can argue that you want to replace the
if (!dma_fence_get_rcu())
return NULL
with
if (!dma_fence_get_rcu()
continue;
but it would be incorrect to say that by simply ignoring the
post-condition check that you do have the right fence.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
