Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: compute wait_ioctl timeout correctly

From: Daniel Vetter
Date: Fri Dec 05 2014 - 04:16:18 EST

On Thu, Dec 04, 2014 at 12:35:44PM -0800, John Stultz wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 7:16 PM, John Stultz <john.stultz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 6:42 PM, John Stultz <john.stultz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>> Sigh. So you're going to make me write a separate patch that moves it over?
> >>>
> >>> We've written it already, Imre posted the link to the old discussion:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> But if the first attempt doesn't sufficiently stick I tend to chase
> >>> the patches any more. But if you want to resurrect this I could ping
> >>> Imre and ask him to pick it up again or you could rebase his patches.
> >>
> >> Well, last I saw the initial patch was buggy, no? I don't think I saw
> >> it being resubmitted.
> >
> > I didn't see your reply in that thread nor in the v2 follow up at
> > Maybe I missed
> > it, but response seems to have been lukewarm overall.
> Ok, I wasn't cc'ed on the v2, thanks for the pointer. There's some
> general lukewarmness to all things jiffies, since getting rid of them
> has been a long term goal forever. But overall that patch set seemed
> ok (though I'm not a fan of macro generation of functions). But minor
> details..

btw have you seen the other fallout from the ktime->nsec conversion in

Is this just the inaccuracy of nsec_to_jiffies (and why it explicitly
states that this is for the scheduler only) or is there some bigger fish
in there?

Insight very much appreciated.

Thanks, Daniel
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 -
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at