Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: protect crtc|connector->state with rcu

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:01:59AM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > Op 20-03-17 om 09:59 schreef Daniel Vetter: > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 09:38:52AM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > >> Op 20-03-17 om 09:18 schreef Daniel Vetter: > >>> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 05:52:32PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: protect crtc|connector->state with rcu

Op 20-03-17 om 11:22 schreef Chris Wilson: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:01:59AM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: >> Op 20-03-17 om 09:59 schreef Daniel Vetter: >>> But my idea was kinda that we'd do the same for probe -> modeset data >>> flows like here for the other way round: Just a bunch of READ_

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: protect crtc|connector->state with rcu

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:01:59AM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > Op 20-03-17 om 09:59 schreef Daniel Vetter: > > But my idea was kinda that we'd do the same for probe -> modeset data > > flows like here for the other way round: Just a bunch of READ_ONCE and > > maybe lookup the edid with rcu to

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: protect crtc|connector->state with rcu

Op 20-03-17 om 09:59 schreef Daniel Vetter: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 09:38:52AM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: >> Op 20-03-17 om 09:18 schreef Daniel Vetter: >>> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 05:52:32PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: Op 16-03-17 om 21:15 schreef Daniel Vetter: > On Thu, Mar 1

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: protect crtc|connector->state with rcu

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 09:38:52AM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > Op 20-03-17 om 09:18 schreef Daniel Vetter: > > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 05:52:32PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > >> Op 16-03-17 om 21:15 schreef Daniel Vetter: > >>> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 5:09 PM, Maarten Lankhorst > >>> wr

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: protect crtc|connector->state with rcu

Op 20-03-17 om 09:18 schreef Daniel Vetter: > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 05:52:32PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: >> Op 16-03-17 om 21:15 schreef Daniel Vetter: >>> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 5:09 PM, Maarten Lankhorst >>> wrote: Op 16-03-17 om 16:52 schreef Daniel Vetter: > The vblank code r

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: protect crtc|connector->state with rcu

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 05:52:32PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > Op 16-03-17 om 21:15 schreef Daniel Vetter: > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 5:09 PM, Maarten Lankhorst > > wrote: > >> Op 16-03-17 om 16:52 schreef Daniel Vetter: > >>> The vblank code really wants to look at crtc->state without havi

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: protect crtc|connector->state with rcu

Op 16-03-17 om 21:15 schreef Daniel Vetter: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 5:09 PM, Maarten Lankhorst > wrote: >> Op 16-03-17 om 16:52 schreef Daniel Vetter: >>> The vblank code really wants to look at crtc->state without having to >>> take a ww_mutex. One option might be to take one of the vblank lock

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: protect crtc|connector->state with rcu

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 5:09 PM, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > Op 16-03-17 om 16:52 schreef Daniel Vetter: >> The vblank code really wants to look at crtc->state without having to >> take a ww_mutex. One option might be to take one of the vblank locks >> right when assigning crtc->state, which would

Re: [PATCH] drm/atomic: protect crtc|connector->state with rcu

Op 16-03-17 om 16:52 schreef Daniel Vetter: > The vblank code really wants to look at crtc->state without having to > take a ww_mutex. One option might be to take one of the vblank locks > right when assigning crtc->state, which would ensure that the vblank > code doesn't race and access freed memo

[PATCH] drm/atomic: protect crtc|connector->state with rcu

The vblank code really wants to look at crtc->state without having to take a ww_mutex. One option might be to take one of the vblank locks right when assigning crtc->state, which would ensure that the vblank code doesn't race and access freed memory. But userspace tends to poke the vblank_ioctl to