Hi Rodrigo,
On 2/19/2024 9:12 PM, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 01:50:47PM +0100, Nirmoy Das wrote:
Error in mmu_interval_notifier_insert() can leave a NULL
notifier.mm pointer. Catch that and return early.
Cc: Andi Shyti<andi.sh...@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Shawn Lee<shawn.c....@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Nirmoy Das<nirmoy....@intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
index 0e21ce9d3e5a..61abfb505766 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_userptr.c
@@ -349,6 +349,9 @@ i915_gem_userptr_release(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
{
GEM_WARN_ON(obj->userptr.page_ref);
+ if (!obj->userptr.notifier.mm)
+ return;
+
hmmm... right, it looks that we need this protection. But...
I mean, feel free to use
Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi<rodrigo.v...@intel.com>
for this patch,
but I believe that if this mmu insert failed we might have other
deeper problems like when checking i915_gem_object_is_userptr() ?
No?!
We are returning an error if mmu insert fails while creating a userptr
object so the obj struct is only available to obj cleanup methods.
As far as I see, i915_gem_object_is_userptr() should not happen on such obj
struct.
Thanks,
Nirmoy
mmu_interval_notifier_remove(&obj->userptr.notifier);
obj->userptr.notifier.mm = NULL;
}
--
2.42.0
