Hi, I'm preparing a fixes pull request, and I'll include this one if it hasn't been applied by others already. Sinclair On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 09:41:22PM +0530, Sumit Semwal wrote: > Hi Thomas, Sinclair, > > On 23 September 2016 at 18:26, Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 08:08:28AM +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: Sinclair Yeh <syeh@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> Cc: Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> Reviewed-by: Sinclair Yeh <syeh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > > > Could you please let me know if this patch is already queued up at > your end, or should I just take it via drm-misc with Sinclair's r-b? > > Thanks and Best, > Sumit. _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
