[PATCH] dma-buf: fix dma_fence_array_signaled v4
Tvrtko Ursulin
tursulin at ursulin.net
Fri Nov 22 16:20:48 UTC 2024
On 22/11/2024 15:30, Christian König wrote:
> The function silently assumed that signaling was already enabled for the
> dma_fence_array. This meant that without enabling signaling first we would
> never see forward progress.
>
> Fix that by falling back to testing each individual fence when signaling
> isn't enabled yet.
>
> v2: add the comment suggested by Boris why this is done this way
> v3: fix the underflow pointed out by Tvrtko
> v4: atomic_read_acquire() as suggested by Tvrtko
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig at amd.com>
> Reviewed-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon at collabora.com>
> Tested-by: Chia-I Wu <olvaffe at gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
> index 8a08ffde31e7..6657d4b30af9 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c
> @@ -103,10 +103,36 @@ static bool dma_fence_array_enable_signaling(struct dma_fence *fence)
> static bool dma_fence_array_signaled(struct dma_fence *fence)
> {
> struct dma_fence_array *array = to_dma_fence_array(fence);
> + int num_pending;
> + unsigned int i;
>
> - if (atomic_read(&array->num_pending) > 0)
> + /*
> + * We need to read num_pending before checking the enable_signal bit
> + * to avoid racing with the enable_signaling() implementation, which
> + * might decrement the counter, and cause a partial check.
> + * atomic_read_acquire() pairs with atomic_dec_and_test() in
> + * dma_fence_array_enable_signaling()
> + *
> + * The !--num_pending check is here to account for the any_signaled case
> + * if we race with enable_signaling(), that means the !num_pending check
> + * in the is_signalling_enabled branch might be outdated (num_pending
> + * might have been decremented), but that's fine. The user will get the
> + * right value when testing again later.
> + */
> + num_pending = atomic_read_acquire(&array->num_pending);
> + if (test_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_ENABLE_SIGNAL_BIT, &array->base.flags)) {
> + if (num_pending <= 0)
> + goto signal;
> return false;
> + }
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < array->num_fences; ++i) {
> + if (dma_fence_is_signaled(array->fences[i]) && !--num_pending)
> + goto signal;
> + }
> + return false;
>
> +signal:
> dma_fence_array_clear_pending_error(array);
> return true;
> }
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at igalia.com>
Regards,
Tvrtko
More information about the dri-devel
mailing list