[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bc3ae5a6-9b04-4f1b-9045-2182138f748e@web.de>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 15:00:23 +0100
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Qianyi Liu <liuqianyi125@...il.com>, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@...il.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>,
David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@...el.com>, Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
Philipp Stanner <phasta@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/scheduler: Fix mem leak when last_scheduled signaled
> Problem: If prev(last_scheduled) was already signaled I encountred a
signalled? encountered?
> memory leak in drm_sched_entity_fini. This is because the
> prev(last_scheduled) fence is not free properly.
freed?
> Fix: Balance the prev(last_scheduled) fence refcnt when
…
reference count?
Would a summary phrase like “Fix memory leak when last_scheduled signalled”
be more appropriate?
How do you think about to add any tags (like “Fixes” and “Cc”) accordingly?
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.14-rc4#n145
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists