From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] drm/i915: use msecs_to_jiffies_timeout
 instead of open coding the same
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 21:00:49 +0300
Message-ID: <1369159249.944.3.camel@ideak-mobl>
References: <1369155800-19654-1-git-send-email-imre.deak@intel.com>
	<1369155800-19654-2-git-send-email-imre.deak@intel.com>
	<CAKMK7uHpc48xuQKSmEe2wWDAxnn97O0RSfNZ9hmeTX=5KAskiA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59CF7E5BF0
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Tue, 21 May 2013 11:00:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAKMK7uHpc48xuQKSmEe2wWDAxnn97O0RSfNZ9hmeTX=5KAskiA@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Tue, 2013-05-21 at 19:20 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> We have another one of these in the wait_for register wait macro in
> intel_drv.h Can you please amend your patch with that fixed up, too?

I noticed it, but didn't change it since we don't need there the +1
adjustment to begin with. The time_after() check already makes sure we
wait at least MS amount. So I think we should remove +1 from there..

--Imre