Danilo Krummrich
2025-Apr-24 13:34 UTC
[PATCH 4/4] drm/nouveau: Check dma_fence in canonical way
(+ drm-misc maintainers) On Thu, Apr 24, 2025 at 03:25:55PM +0200, Philipp Stanner wrote:> On Thu, 2025-04-24 at 15:24 +0200, Danilo Krummrich wrote: > > On 4/24/25 3:02 PM, Philipp Stanner wrote: > > > In nouveau_fence_done(), a fence is checked for being signaled by > > > manually evaluating the base fence's bits. This can be done in a > > > canonical manner through dma_fence_is_signaled(). > > > > > > Replace the bit-check with dma_fence_is_signaled(). > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Philipp Stanner <phasta at kernel.org> > > > --- > > > ? drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_fence.c | 2 +- > > > ? 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_fence.c > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_fence.c > > > index fb9811938c82..d5654e26d5bc 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_fence.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_fence.c > > > @@ -253,7 +253,7 @@ nouveau_fence_done(struct nouveau_fence *fence) > > > ?? struct nouveau_channel *chan; > > > ?? unsigned long flags; > > > ? > > > - if (test_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_SIGNALED_BIT, &fence- > > > >base.flags)) > > > + if (dma_fence_is_signaled(&fence->base)) > > > > This is only correct with commit bbe5679f30d7 ("drm/nouveau: Fix > > WARN_ON in > > nouveau_fence_context_kill()") from drm-misc-fixes, correct? > > Yup. Otherwise, this series can't be merged anyways, because patch 1 > depends on it. > > The cover letter says so: "This series is based on this partially > merged series: [1]"Well, the series may be based on commit bbe5679f30d7, but all patches from the series can still be applied independently. Only patch 4 depends on this commit in terms of correctness. But that's fine, I think we can get drm-misc-fixes (or the next -rc) backmerged into drm-misc-next.