2023-06-26 15:11:47

by Sui Jingfeng

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] drm/tegra: Return an error code if fails

Return -ENOMEM if tegra_bo_mmap() fails.

Signed-off-by: Sui Jingfeng <[email protected]>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c
index dea38892d6e6..0ce22935fbd3 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c
@@ -710,6 +710,8 @@ static int tegra_gem_prime_vmap(struct dma_buf *buf, struct iosys_map *map)
void *vaddr;

vaddr = tegra_bo_mmap(&bo->base);
+ if (!vaddr)
+ return -ENOMEM;
if (IS_ERR(vaddr))
return PTR_ERR(vaddr);

--
2.25.1



2023-07-27 10:19:56

by Sui Jingfeng

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [1/2] drm/tegra: Return an error code if fails

Hi,

Gentle ping for this series.


On 2023/6/26 22:33, Sui Jingfeng wrote:
> Return -ENOMEM if tegra_bo_mmap() fails.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sui Jingfeng <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c
> index dea38892d6e6..0ce22935fbd3 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c
> @@ -710,6 +710,8 @@ static int tegra_gem_prime_vmap(struct dma_buf *buf, struct iosys_map *map)
> void *vaddr;
>
> vaddr = tegra_bo_mmap(&bo->base);
> + if (!vaddr)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> if (IS_ERR(vaddr))
> return PTR_ERR(vaddr);
>


2023-10-10 13:23:27

by Thierry Reding

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/tegra: Return an error code if fails

On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 10:33:30PM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote:
> Return -ENOMEM if tegra_bo_mmap() fails.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sui Jingfeng <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

Sorry, this fell through the cracks. I think it'd be better if
tegra_bo_mmap() were to be improved to always return either an ERR_PTR()
encoded error code or a valid pointer. Throwing NULL into the mix isn't
useful because it typically means something like -ENOMEM anyway. Error
codes are more explicit, so since we're already using them for some
cases, might as well return them for all.

Actually, looks like tegra_bo_mmap() never actually returns an ERR_PTR()
encoded error code. It's either obj->vaddr, the return value of vmap()
(which is either NULL or the address of the mapping), or the address
obtained from dma_buf_vmap_unlocked() (i.e. map.vaddr) or NULL on
failure. So I think it would equally make sense to keep your patch and
to remove the IS_ERR() check below it.

I would slightly prefer the first option, but either is fine.

Thierry

> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c
> index dea38892d6e6..0ce22935fbd3 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c
> @@ -710,6 +710,8 @@ static int tegra_gem_prime_vmap(struct dma_buf *buf, struct iosys_map *map)
> void *vaddr;
>
> vaddr = tegra_bo_mmap(&bo->base);
> + if (!vaddr)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> if (IS_ERR(vaddr))
> return PTR_ERR(vaddr);
>
> --
> 2.25.1
>


Attachments:
(No filename) (1.55 kB)
signature.asc (849.00 B)
Download all attachments

2023-10-10 15:32:05

by Thierry Reding

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/tegra: Return an error code if fails

From b34a09efcf7b1d2c25d3baf8c6d91c5ca09b4e0f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Thierry Reding <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2023 17:26:14 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] drm/tegra: gem: Do not return NULL in tegra_bo_mmap()

It's confusing for a function to return NULL and ERR_PTR()-encoded error
codes on failure. Make sure we only ever return the latter since that's
what callers already expect.

Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <[email protected]>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c | 13 +++++++++++--
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c
index 11296de59c5a..679460e05c05 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c
@@ -178,6 +178,7 @@ static void *tegra_bo_mmap(struct host1x_bo *bo)
{
struct tegra_bo *obj = host1x_to_tegra_bo(bo);
struct iosys_map map;
+ void *vaddr;
int ret;

if (obj->vaddr)
@@ -185,10 +186,18 @@ static void *tegra_bo_mmap(struct host1x_bo *bo)

if (obj->gem.import_attach) {
ret = dma_buf_vmap_unlocked(obj->gem.import_attach->dmabuf, &map);
- return ret ? NULL : map.vaddr;
+ if (ret < 0)
+ return ERR_PTR(ret);
+
+ return map.vaddr;
}

- return vmap(obj->pages, obj->num_pages, VM_MAP, pgprot_writecombine(PAGE_KERNEL));
+ vaddr = vmap(obj->pages, obj->num_pages, VM_MAP,
+ pgprot_writecombine(PAGE_KERNEL));
+ if (!vaddr)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ return vaddr;
}

static void tegra_bo_munmap(struct host1x_bo *bo, void *addr)
--
2.42.0


Attachments:
(No filename) (0.00 B)
signature.asc (849.00 B)
Download all attachments

2023-10-11 03:07:07

by Sui Jingfeng

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/tegra: Return an error code if fails

Hi,


On 2023/10/10 23:31, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 03:22:56PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 10:33:30PM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote:
>>> Return -ENOMEM if tegra_bo_mmap() fails.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sui Jingfeng <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/gem.c | 2 ++
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>> Sorry, this fell through the cracks. I think it'd be better if
>> tegra_bo_mmap() were to be improved to always return either an ERR_PTR()
>> encoded error code or a valid pointer. Throwing NULL into the mix isn't
>> useful because it typically means something like -ENOMEM anyway. Error
>> codes are more explicit, so since we're already using them for some
>> cases, might as well return them for all.
>>
>> Actually, looks like tegra_bo_mmap() never actually returns an ERR_PTR()
>> encoded error code. It's either obj->vaddr, the return value of vmap()
>> (which is either NULL or the address of the mapping), or the address
>> obtained from dma_buf_vmap_unlocked() (i.e. map.vaddr) or NULL on
>> failure. So I think it would equally make sense to keep your patch and
>> to remove the IS_ERR() check below it.
>>
>> I would slightly prefer the first option, but either is fine.
> How about the attached patch?


I also prefer the prefer the first option.
The attached patch is more better, because it solve the problem at lower level.

Reviewed-by: Sui Jingfeng <[email protected]>

> Thierry