From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mout-p-202.mailbox.org (mout-p-202.mailbox.org [80.241.56.172]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06B8F2451F1 for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2025 09:53:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=80.241.56.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740390791; cv=none; b=czi0FKcDPuAj831n4DrhxlclUmgU4fn0MjheNMB9CP+whFvgg2IzKNfrpmTKlBryLQGf4yQIAhBdJJtom+24/TxwMvl0m9ih5+sW+jZB02mjvOFjiZrPhxi+iUVx4hG76bpJ0/2u/TECnD2Slm0mykHsh6KvFz7vQwZmYd25rsE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740390791; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Og9RtG7GpaYMWovVmA699lsFaaCKSYqXRTt157pq6WY=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=ec63EX5iWuyxEebwMWZTHATEqjZu/En9UyrxN4svUG4hu/tLUSHEwQY5mEs9u7hrUWF98Wblr+f0Rvioo9lZL03dF5L9pxfxxvHD/PIgc+uvirKGOS9K/LlfQz4tEB4C9Jvw2GrX2PbGQkr+pVXeFSEwUtfURpSn0z/sqnzH5pU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=mailbox.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mailbox.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mailbox.org header.i=@mailbox.org header.b=R2vsewlS; arc=none smtp.client-ip=80.241.56.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=mailbox.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mailbox.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mailbox.org header.i=@mailbox.org header.b="R2vsewlS" Received: from smtp2.mailbox.org (smtp2.mailbox.org [IPv6:2001:67c:2050:b231:465::2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mout-p-202.mailbox.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Z1bdS51RDz9sp7; Mon, 24 Feb 2025 10:53:00 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mailbox.org; s=mail20150812; t=1740390780; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=boC3bouyoaSvBm6PU/jvOFqOLo282xREKBk3M94rwD0=; b=R2vsewlSUvVw6M21xKZNLmYLlmbf7fi/rdOTdWUyzZCQMkcjA7gb8+DhGWUmZ5TbQ7XYdx rqqTGqICbXcIPSMW8VRsR1PLYlI3fp6/h7X9vPgHTQttBHwDLefdaC3m3OBk/pcTC/qvOy ALCYhxvE6nMIhMMzkQijbwC78h+UNKltfnRS3VP0OQw0osBv8yKO2iBRm6zBxBwERCNwV+ jFhROFb5itWpAVUa2ebvMeD2kCgOoLGco7spzoyqWUur8dwD1mXtuBLK/pRbs4grB6rkSa m2QdI40qIadd6BrX6Xr9YyPq6gGtOKHO1NkEhN9B18bCal4322JTgQZVaKzf5g== Message-ID: <3b369e1a49b354852f361b103999673e4f7906a9.camel@mailbox.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/scheduler: Fix mem leak when last_scheduled signaled From: Philipp Stanner Reply-To: phasta@kernel.org To: qianyi liu , Danilo Krummrich , Matthew Brost , Philipp Stanner , Christian =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6nig?= , Maarten Lankhorst , Maxime Ripard , Thomas Zimmermann , David Airlie , Daniel Vetter Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 10:52:56 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20250221062702.1293754-1-liuqianyi125@gmail.com> References: <20250221062702.1293754-1-liuqianyi125@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MBO-RS-ID: 977615c1c76e705c497 X-MBO-RS-META: je8iqfkdcauxx1gactnrgz41ok6gim6q Hello, subject line: please write "drm/sched" instead of "drm/scheduler". It has become the norm On Fri, 2025-02-21 at 14:27 +0800, qianyi liu wrote: > Problem: If prev(last_scheduled) was already signaled I encountred a prev(last_scheduled) almost reads like a function call. Maybe write "prev / last_scheduled"? > memory leak in drm_sched_entity_fini. This is because the > prev(last_scheduled) fence is not free properly. s/free/freed >=20 > Fix: Balance the prev(last_scheduled) fence refcnt when > dma_fence_add_callback failed. >=20 > Signed-off-by: qianyi liu > --- > =C2=A0drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_entity.c | 7 +++++-- > =C2=A01 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >=20 > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_entity.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_entity.c > index 69bcf0e99d57..1c0c14bcf726 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_entity.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_entity.c > @@ -259,9 +259,12 @@ static void drm_sched_entity_kill(struct > drm_sched_entity *entity) > =C2=A0 struct drm_sched_fence *s_fence =3D job->s_fence; > =C2=A0 > =C2=A0 dma_fence_get(&s_fence->finished); > - if (!prev || dma_fence_add_callback(prev, &job- > >finish_cb, > - =C2=A0=C2=A0 > drm_sched_entity_kill_jobs_cb)) > + if (!prev || > + =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 dma_fence_add_callback(prev, &job->finish_cb, > + =C2=A0=C2=A0 > drm_sched_entity_kill_jobs_cb)) { > + dma_fence_put(prev); But now the fence will also be put when prev =3D=3D NULL. Is that intentional? It doesn't seem correct to me from looking at the commit message, which states "Balance [=E2=80=A6] refcnt when dma_fence_add_callba= ck failed" It didn't get clear to me immediately which dma_fence_get() your new dma_fence_put() balances. Can you ellaborate on that or maybe write a comment? But also be handy of could share the kmemleak trace. Thanks P. > =C2=A0 drm_sched_entity_kill_jobs_cb(NULL, &job- > >finish_cb); > + } > =C2=A0 > =C2=A0 prev =3D &s_fence->finished; > =C2=A0 }