drm: mm always protect change to unused_nodes with unused_lock spinlock
unused_nodes modification needs to be protected by unused_lock spinlock.
Here is an example of an usage where there is no such protection without
this patch.
Process 1: 1-drm_mm_pre_get(this function modify unused_nodes list)
2-spin_lock(spinlock protecting mm struct)
3-drm_mm_put_block(this function might modify unused_nodes
list but doesn't protect modification with unused_lock)
4-spin_unlock(spinlock protecting mm struct)
Process2: 1-drm_mm_pre_get(this function modify unused_nodes list)
At this point Process1 & Process2 might both be doing modification to
unused_nodes list. This patch add unused_lock protection into
drm_mm_put_block to avoid such issue.
Signed-off-by: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mm.c
index c861d80..97dc5a4 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_mm.c
@@ -103,6 +103,11 @@
return child;
}
+/* drm_mm_pre_get() - pre allocate drm_mm_node structure
+ * drm_mm: memory manager struct we are pre-allocating for
+ *
+ * Returns 0 on success or -ENOMEM if allocation fails.
+ */
int drm_mm_pre_get(struct drm_mm *mm)
{
struct drm_mm_node *node;
@@ -253,12 +258,14 @@
prev_node->size += next_node->size;
list_del(&next_node->ml_entry);
list_del(&next_node->fl_entry);
+ spin_lock(&mm->unused_lock);
if (mm->num_unused < MM_UNUSED_TARGET) {
list_add(&next_node->fl_entry,
&mm->unused_nodes);
++mm->num_unused;
} else
kfree(next_node);
+ spin_unlock(&mm->unused_lock);
} else {
next_node->size += cur->size;
next_node->start = cur->start;
@@ -271,11 +278,13 @@
list_add(&cur->fl_entry, &mm->fl_entry);
} else {
list_del(&cur->ml_entry);
+ spin_lock(&mm->unused_lock);
if (mm->num_unused < MM_UNUSED_TARGET) {
list_add(&cur->fl_entry, &mm->unused_nodes);
++mm->num_unused;
} else
kfree(cur);
+ spin_unlock(&mm->unused_lock);
}
}