We have relied upon the sole caller (wait_ioctl) validating the timeout
argument. However, when waiting for multiple requests I forgot to ensure
that the timeout was still positive on the later requests. This is more
simply done inside __i915_wait_request.
Fixes a minor regression introduced in
commit b47161858ba13c9c7e03333132230d66e008dd55
Author: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Date: Mon Apr 27 13:41:17 2015 +0100
drm/i915: Implement inter-engine read-read optimisations
where we may end up waiting for an extra jiffie for each active ring
after consuming all of the user's timeout.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Lionel Landwerlin <lionel.g.landwer...@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 12 ++++++++++--
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
index f33c35c6130f..65d101b47d8e 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
@@ -1251,8 +1251,16 @@ int __i915_wait_request(struct drm_i915_gem_request *req,
if (i915_gem_request_completed(req, true))
return 0;
- timeout_expire = timeout ?
- jiffies + nsecs_to_jiffies_timeout((u64)*timeout) : 0;
+ timeout_expire = 0;
+ if (timeout) {
+ if (WARN_ON(*timeout < 0))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ if (*timeout == 0)
+ return -ETIME;
+
+ timeout_expire = jiffies + nsecs_to_jiffies_timeout(*timeout);
+ }
if (INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->gen >= 6)
gen6_rps_boost(dev_priv, rps, req->emitted_jiffies);
--
2.6.2
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
