Hi Alex, On 23 September 2016 at 18:24, Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 08:08:24AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: >> Since fence_wait_timeout_reservation_object_wait_timeout_rcu() with a >> timeout of 0 becomes reservation_object_test_signaled_rcu(), we do not >> need to handle such conversion in the caller. The only challenge are >> those callers that wish to differentiate the error code between the >> nonblocking busy check and potentially blocking wait. >> >> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@xxxxxxx> >> Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> >> --- I couldn't find if its already applied to your tree, or your acked-by; could you please let me know if it's there, or if you'd like me to pick it up via drm-misc (and an Acked-by would be appreciated in the latter case :) ) Best, Sumit. _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
