On 4/29/2025 2:41 AM, Jacek Lawrynowicz wrote:
Hi,
On 4/28/2025 4:21 PM, Jeff Hugo wrote:
On 4/28/2025 12:47 AM, Jacek Lawrynowicz wrote:
Hi,
On 4/25/2025 7:22 PM, Jeff Hugo wrote:
On 4/25/2025 3:36 AM, Jacek Lawrynowicz wrote:
From: Karol Wachowski <karol.wachow...@intel.com>
The mutex unlock for vdev->submitted_jobs_lock was incorrectly placed
after unlocking file_priv->lock. Change order of unlocks to avoid potential
This should read "before unlocking", right?
Yes, I will correct the commit message after submitting this patch :)
It does not look like this would apply to -next. Does it depend on something
else? The locking order in -next appears correct.
Both -fixes and -next have incorrect order, see:
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/misc/kernel/-/blob/drm-misc-next/drivers/accel/ivpu/ivpu_job.c#L683
https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/misc/kernel/-/blob/drm-misc-fixes/drivers/accel/ivpu/ivpu_job.c#L683
The patch applies to both without issues.
Huh, I'm not sure what I was looking at yesterday. I'm seeing it today.
Assuming the commit message fix discussed previously
Reviewed-by: Jeff Hugo <jeff.h...@oss.qualcomm.com>
