On 01/15/2015 01:10 PM, Nick Hoath wrote:
void intel_execlists_retire_requests(struct intel_engine_cs *ring) { - struct intel_ctx_submit_request *req, *tmp; + struct drm_i915_gem_request *req, *tmp; struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = ring->dev->dev_private; unsigned long flags; struct list_head retired_list; @@ -776,7 +771,7 @@ void intel_execlists_retire_requests(struct intel_engine_cs *ring) spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ring->execlist_lock, flags);list_for_each_entry_safe(req, tmp, &retired_list, execlist_link) { - struct intel_context *ctx = req->request->ctx; + struct intel_context *ctx = req->ctx; struct drm_i915_gem_object *ctx_obj = ctx->engine[ring->id].state; @@ -784,9 +779,8 @@ void intel_execlists_retire_requests(struct intel_engine_cs *ring) intel_lr_context_unpin(ring, ctx); intel_runtime_pm_put(dev_priv); i915_gem_context_unreference(ctx); - i915_gem_request_unreference(req->request); + i915_gem_request_unreference(req); list_del(&req->execlist_link);
It looks like the this req unreference can be the last one in which case list_del explodes. I don't know if it was intended that it cannot be the last unreference, but I have a log which proves it can be. :)
Regards, Tvrtko _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
