Hi,

On Mon, 9 Sep 2019 from Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>

>

> Hmm, I think the patch is wrong.  As far I know it is the qxl drivers's

> job to call ttm_eu_backoff_reservation().  Doing that automatically in

> ttm will most likely break other ttm users.

>

Perhaps.

>So I guess the call is missing in the qxl driver somewhere, most likely

>in some error handling code path given that this bug is a relatively

>rare event.

>

>There is only a single ttm_eu_reserve_buffers() call in qxl.

>So how about this?

>

No preference in either way if it is a right cure.

BTW a quick peep at the mainline tree shows not every

ttm_eu_reserve_buffers() pairs with ttm_eu_backoff_reservation()

without qxl being taken in account.

Hillf