On Fri, 17 Feb 2023 at 13:06, Christian König
wrote:
>
> Am 16.02.23 um 15:34 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
> > On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 03:30:31PM +0100, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> Am 26.01.23 um 11:28 schrieb Christian König:
> >>> We reference dump buffers both by their handle as well a
Am 16.02.23 um 15:34 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 03:30:31PM +0100, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
Hi
Am 26.01.23 um 11:28 schrieb Christian König:
We reference dump buffers both by their handle as well as their
object. The problem is now that when anybody iterates over the DRM
fra
On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 03:30:31PM +0100, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
> Hi
>
> Am 26.01.23 um 11:28 schrieb Christian König:
> > We reference dump buffers both by their handle as well as their
> > object. The problem is now that when anybody iterates over the DRM
> > framebuffers and exports the unde
Hi
Am 26.01.23 um 11:28 schrieb Christian König:
We reference dump buffers both by their handle as well as their
object. The problem is now that when anybody iterates over the DRM
framebuffers and exports the underlying GEM objects through DMA-buf
we run into a circular reference count situation
We reference dump buffers both by their handle as well as their
object. The problem is now that when anybody iterates over the DRM
framebuffers and exports the underlying GEM objects through DMA-buf
we run into a circular reference count situation.
The result is that the fbdev handling holds the G
