drm/amdgpu: add a missing lock for AMDGPU_SCHED
Subsystems (3)
PATCH v2 1/1 drm/amdgpu: add a missing lock for AMDGPU_SCHED
mgr->ctx_handles should be protected by mgr->lock.
v2: improve commit message
--- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_sched.c | 6 +++++- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_sched.c +5 -1
@@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ static int amdgpu_sched_process_priority_override(struct amdgpu_device *adev, {struct fd f =fdget (fd);struct amdgpu_fpriv *fpriv; +struct amdgpu_ctx_mgr *mgr;struct amdgpu_ctx *ctx;uint32_t id;int r;
@@ -51,8 +52,11 @@ static int amdgpu_sched_process_priority_override(struct amdgpu_device *adev,return r; } -idr_for_each_entry (&fpriv->ctx_mgr.ctx_handles, ctx, id) + mgr = &fpriv->ctx_mgr; +mutex_lock (&mgr->lock); +idr_for_each_entry (&mgr->ctx_handles, ctx, id)amdgpu_ctx_priority_override (ctx, priority); +mutex_unlock (&mgr->lock);fdput (f);return 0 ;
Signature · 1 line
2.40.1.495.gc816e09b53d-goog
Greg KH
maintainerQuoted 6 lines · Chia-I Wu
mgr->ctx_handlesshould be protected bymgr->lock.v2: improve commit message
Signed-off-by Chia-I Wu <[email protected]>
What commit id does this fix? How far back in stable kernels should this go?
thanks,
greg k-h
Christian König
maintainerAm 26.04.23 um 08:17 schrieb Chia-I Wu:
Quoted 6 lines
mgr->ctx_handlesshould be protected bymgr->lock.v2: improve commit message
Signed-off-by Chia-I Wu <[email protected]>
Please don't manually CC [email protected] while sending patches out, let us maintainers push that upstream with the appropriate tag and Greg picking it up from there.
A Fixes tag and figuring out to which stable versions this needs to be backported are nice to have as well, but Alex and I can take care of that as well.
Apart from that the technical side of the patch is Reviewed-by: Christian König <[email protected]>.
Regards,
Christian.
Quoted 29 lines
--- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_sched.c | 6 +++++- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_sched.c +5
-1@@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ static int amdgpu_sched_process_priority_override(struct amdgpu_device *adev, {struct fd f =fdget (fd);struct amdgpu_fpriv *fpriv; +struct amdgpu_ctx_mgr *mgr;struct amdgpu_ctx *ctx;uint32_t id;int r;@@ -51,8 +52,11 @@ static int amdgpu_sched_process_priority_override(struct amdgpu_device *adev,return r; } -idr_for_each_entry (&fpriv->ctx_mgr.ctx_handles, ctx, id) + mgr = &fpriv->ctx_mgr; +mutex_lock (&mgr->lock); +idr_for_each_entry (&mgr->ctx_handles, ctx, id)amdgpu_ctx_priority_override (ctx, priority); +mutex_unlock (&mgr->lock);fdput (f);return 0 ;
Quoted 13 lines · Christian König
Am 26.04.23 um 08:17 schrieb Chia-I Wu:
Quoted 6 lines
mgr->ctx_handlesshould be protected bymgr->lock.v2: improve commit message
Signed-off-by Chia-I Wu <[email protected]>Please don't manually CC [email protected] while sending patches out, let us maintainers push that upstream with the appropriate tag and Greg picking it up from there.
Quoted 6 lines
A Fixes tag and figuring out to which stable versions this needs to be backported are nice to have as well, but Alex and I can take care of that as well.
Apart from that the technical side of the patch is Reviewed-by:
Christian König <[email protected]>.
All done. Thanks for clarifying the process and sorry for getting it wrong in the first place :(
Quoted 34 lines
Regards,
Christian.Quoted 29 lines
--- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_sched.c | 6 +++++- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_sched.c +5
-1@@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ static int amdgpu_sched_process_priority_override(struct amdgpu_device *adev, {struct fd f =fdget (fd);struct amdgpu_fpriv *fpriv; +struct amdgpu_ctx_mgr *mgr;struct amdgpu_ctx *ctx;uint32_t id;int r;@@ -51,8 +52,11 @@ static int amdgpu_sched_process_priority_override(struct amdgpu_device *adev,return r; } -idr_for_each_entry (&fpriv->ctx_mgr.ctx_handles, ctx, id) + mgr = &fpriv->ctx_mgr; +mutex_lock (&mgr->lock); +idr_for_each_entry (&mgr->ctx_handles, ctx, id)amdgpu_ctx_priority_override (ctx, priority); +mutex_unlock (&mgr->lock);fdput (f);return 0 ;