[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <811ba40a31484ca5db4b0c380b9e67bec6517e4b.camel@mailbox.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 15:05:41 +0100
From: Philipp Stanner <phasta@...lbox.org>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>, 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
On Tue, 2025-02-25 at 15:00 +0100, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > 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
>
He has already addressed that in v2.
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250225094125.224580-1-liuqianyi125@gmail.com/
Besides, Matthew and I made those remarks already here in v1.
P.
> Regards,
> Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists