Re: linux-next: manual merge of the drm tree with the drm-misc-fixes tree

[Vasily Khoruzhick]

On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 2:18 PM Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi all,

Hi Mark,

> Today's linux-next merge of the drm tree got a conflict in:
>
>   drivers/gpu/drm/lima/lima_gem.c
>
> between commit:
>
>   21670bd78a25001cf8e ("drm/lima: fix lima_gem_wait() return value")
>
> from the drm-misc-fixes tree and commit:
>
>   52791eeec1d9f4a7e7f ("dma-buf: rename reservation_object to dma_resv")
>
> from the drm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.

Fix looks correct to me. Sorry for not testing my patch with
linux-next, I'll make sure it at least compiles next time.

> diff --cc drivers/gpu/drm/lima/lima_gem.c
> index b609dc030d6ca,ff3d9acc24fcf..0000000000000
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/lima/lima_gem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/lima/lima_gem.c
> @@@ -341,8 -341,8 +341,8 @@@ int lima_gem_wait(struct drm_file *file
>
>         timeout = drm_timeout_abs_to_jiffies(timeout_ns);
>
> -       ret = drm_gem_reservation_object_wait(file, handle, write, timeout);
> +       ret = drm_gem_dma_resv_wait(file, handle, write, timeout);
>  -      if (ret == 0)
>  +      if (ret == -ETIME)
>                 ret = timeout ? -ETIMEDOUT : -EBUSY;
>
>         return ret;