-
Lucas De Marchi authored
The current dsb API is not really prepared to handle multithread access. I was debugging an issue that ended up fixed by commit a096883d ("drm/i915/dsb: Remove PIN_MAPPABLE from the DSB object VMA") and was puzzled how these atomic operations were guaranteeing atomicity. if (atomic_add_return(1, &dsb->refcount) != 1) return dsb; Thread A could still be initializing dsb struct (and even fail in the middle) while thread B would take a reference and use it (even derefencing a NULL cmd_buf). I don't think the atomic operations here will help much if this were to support multithreaded scenario in future, so just remove them to avoid confusion. v2: Use refcount++ != 0 instead of ++refcount != 1 (from Ville) Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com> Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20191111205024.22853-2-lucas.demarchi@intel.com Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20191116011539.18230-1-lucas.demarchi@intel.com
ac4eead3