[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2019 09:41:22 +0200
From: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@...hat.com>
To: davidriley@...omium.org
Cc: dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] drm/virtio: Add memory barriers for capset cache.
On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 04:44:23PM -0700, davidriley@...omium.org wrote:
> From: David Riley <davidriley@...omium.org>
>
> After data is copied to the cache entry, atomic_set is used indicate
> that the data is the entry is valid without appropriate memory barriers.
> Similarly the read side was missing the same memory barries.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Riley <davidriley@...omium.org>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_ioctl.c | 3 +++
> drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_vq.c | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_ioctl.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_ioctl.c
> index 88c1ed57a3c5..502f5f7c2298 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_ioctl.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/virtio/virtgpu_ioctl.c
> @@ -542,6 +542,9 @@ static int virtio_gpu_get_caps_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
> if (!ret)
> return -EBUSY;
>
> + /* is_valid check must proceed before copy of the cache entry. */
> + virt_rmb();
I don't think you need virt_rmb() here. This isn't guest <=> host
communication, so a normal barrier should do.
The other three fixes are queued up for drm-misc-next.
cheers,
Gerd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists