On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 05:48:26PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 08:54:35AM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 01:27:43PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 06:09:26PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > > This fixes a regression from > > > > > > > > commit 5ed0bdf21a85d78e04f89f15ccf227562177cbd9 > > > > Author: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Date: Wed Jul 16 21:05:06 2014 +0000 > > > > > > > > drm: i915: Use nsec based interfaces > > > > > > > > that made a negative timeout return immediately rather than the > > > > previously defined behaviour of waiting indefinitely. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: Ben Widawsky <benjamin.widawsky@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: Kristian Høgsberg <krh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > > > Do you have the igt for this too? I think an wait while the buffer should > > > be busy with a negative timeout is all that's needed to exercise this. > > > > Done. > > Testcase: igt/gem_wait > > Thanks a lot. > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89494 -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
