diff options
| author | Michel Dänzer <michel.daenzer@amd.com> | 2017-03-24 19:01:09 +0900 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com> | 2017-03-27 16:17:30 -0400 |
| commit | ce4b4f228e51219b0b79588caf73225b08b5b779 (patch) | |
| tree | 992a2ba61ad8a19f91314e09b3cfad6bd40690e2 /drivers/gpu | |
| parent | d64a04720b0e64c1cd0726a3a27b360822fbee22 (diff) | |
| download | linux-ce4b4f228e51219b0b79588caf73225b08b5b779.tar.bz2 | |
drm/radeon: Override fpfn for all VRAM placements in radeon_evict_flags
We were accidentally only overriding the first VRAM placement. For BOs
with the RADEON_GEM_NO_CPU_ACCESS flag set,
radeon_ttm_placement_from_domain creates a second VRAM placment with
fpfn == 0. If VRAM is almost full, the first VRAM placement with
fpfn > 0 may not work, but the second one with fpfn == 0 always will
(the BO's current location trivially satisfies it). Because "moving"
the BO to its current location puts it back on the LRU list, this
results in an infinite loop.
Fixes: 2a85aedd117c ("drm/radeon: Try evicting from CPU accessible to
inaccessible VRAM first")
Reported-by: Zachary Michaels <zmichaels@oblong.com>
Reported-and-Tested-by: Julien Isorce <jisorce@oblong.com>
Reviewed-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
Reviewed-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Michel Dänzer <michel.daenzer@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Diffstat (limited to 'drivers/gpu')
| -rw-r--r-- | drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ttm.c | 4 |
1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ttm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ttm.c index 684f1703aa5c..aaa3e80fecb4 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ttm.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_ttm.c @@ -213,8 +213,8 @@ static void radeon_evict_flags(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo, rbo->placement.num_busy_placement = 0; for (i = 0; i < rbo->placement.num_placement; i++) { if (rbo->placements[i].flags & TTM_PL_FLAG_VRAM) { - if (rbo->placements[0].fpfn < fpfn) - rbo->placements[0].fpfn = fpfn; + if (rbo->placements[i].fpfn < fpfn) + rbo->placements[i].fpfn = fpfn; } else { rbo->placement.busy_placement = &rbo->placements[i]; |