Re: [PATCH 1/4] drm/i915: add msecs_to_jiffies_timeout to guarantee minimum duration

[Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>]

On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 12:57:01PM +0300, Imre Deak wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-05-22 at 11:46 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Jani Nikula
> > <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 21 May 2013, Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com> wrote:
> > >> We need this to avoid premature timeouts whenever scheduling a timeout
> > >> based on the current jiffies value. For an explanation see [1].
> > >> The following patches will take the helper into use.
> > >>
> > >> Once the more generic solution proposed in the thread at [1] is accepted
> > >> this patch can be reverted while keeping the follow-up patches.
> > >>
> > >> [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=136854294730957&w=2
> > >
> > > With the name clashes, what happens when the generic solution is merged?
> > > Blows up the build? To avoid confusion with merging upstream and
> > > potential stable backports, should we err on the safe side and rename
> > > these? Or add suitable trickery to use the generic version when
> > > available?
> > 
> > linux-next should catch such fallout and we can fix up things in the
> > merge. And since Linus has intel graphics I expect that he'll catch it
> > if it fails to compile ;-)
> 
> Yea, I haven't thought this through properly. But after discussing with
> Jani, this seems to be doable. I only hope Linus won't have to resolve
> anything :)

Ok, I've picked up the entire pile for -fixes, thanks for the patches.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch