On la, 2017-08-05 at 20:19 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > The wait-ioctl is optionally supplied a timeout with nanosecond > precision in a s64 field. We use nsecs_to_jiffies64() to convert that > into the jiffies consumed by the scheduler, but internally > nsecs_to_jiffies64() does not guard against overflow (as it's purpose is > for use by the scheduler and not drivers!). So we must guard against the > overflow ourselves, and in the process note that we may then return > much earlier than the timeout selected by the user, so don't report > ETIME unless we do hit the timeout. (Woe betold us though if the user > waits for a year (32bit) and the request is still not complete!) > > Reported-by: Jason Ekstrand <jason.ekstrand@xxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> <SNIP> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > index 44df7dc3f880..b5794add4a3a 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > @@ -3543,6 +3543,10 @@ i915_gem_wait_ioctl(struct file *filp, > */ > if (ret == -ETIME && !nsecs_to_jiffies(arg.timeout_ns)) > arg.timeout_ns = 0; > + > + /* Asked to wait beyond the jiffie/scheduler precision */ > + if (ret == -ETIME && arg.timeout_ns) > + ret = -EAGAIN; -EAGAIN is documented as "GPU wedged" in the ioctl documentation. So better update that documentation. Regards, Joonas -- Joonas Lahtinen Open Source Technology Center Intel Corporation _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
