Chris Wilson <[email protected]> writes: > We need to allow concurrent intel_context_unpin, which means avoiding > doing destructive operations like intel_ring_reset(). This was already > fixed for intel_ring_unpin() in commit 0725d9a31869 ("drm/i915/gt: Make > intel_ring_unpin() safe for concurrent pint"), but I overlooked that > execlists_context_unpin() also made the same mistake. > > Reported-by: Matthew Brost <[email protected]> > Fixes: 841350223816 ("drm/i915/gt: Drop mutex serialisation between context > pin/unpin") > References: 0725d9a31869 ("drm/i915/gt: Make intel_ring_unpin() safe for > concurrent pint") > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <[email protected]> > Cc: Matthew Brost <[email protected]> > Cc: Matthew Auld <[email protected]> > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c > index a8fe2f16c910..999fe82190da 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c > @@ -2532,7 +2532,6 @@ static void execlists_context_unpin(struct > intel_context *ce) > ce->engine); > > i915_gem_object_unpin_map(ce->state->obj); > - intel_ring_reset(ce->ring, ce->ring->tail);
It seems we have entered an era where intel_ring_reset() is actually resetting the ring. Long live the engine(s)! Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <[email protected]> > } > > static void > -- > 2.25.0 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
