Re: [PATCH] drm/tinydrm: mipi-dbi: Fix unbalanced DMA access

From: David Lechner
Date: Thu Aug 03 2017 - 18:41:10 EST

On 08/01/2017 03:14 PM, David Lechner wrote:
If we return here and import_attach is true, then dma_buf_end_cpu_access()
will not be called balance dma_buf_begin_cpu_access().

Fix by setting ret instead of returning.

Signed-off-by: David Lechner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
drivers/gpu/drm/tinydrm/mipi-dbi.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tinydrm/mipi-dbi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tinydrm/mipi-dbi.c
index c83eeb7..e10fa4b 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tinydrm/mipi-dbi.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tinydrm/mipi-dbi.c
@@ -183,7 +183,8 @@ static int mipi_dbi_buf_copy(void *dst, struct drm_framebuffer *fb,
dev_err_once(fb->dev->dev, "Format is not supported: %s\n",
- return -EINVAL;
+ ret = -EINVAL;
+ break;
if (import_attach)

I just realized that the next line here can mask ret.

if (import_attach)
ret = dma_buf_end_cpu_access(import_attach->dmabuf,

So, we should either ignore the return value from dma_buf_end_cpu_access() always or add some logic to ignore it if ret is already an error.

In some of the other patches I have been sending, we have the same situation. I those, I have opted to just ignore the return value from dma_buf_end_cpu_access(). e.g...

if (import_attach)
dma_buf_end_cpu_access(import_attach->dmabuf, DMA_FROM_DEVICE);

Is this a reasonable thing to do?