Re: [PATCH 01/12] drm/i915: Add wait_for_us

[Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>]

On 02/02/16 13:35, Dave Gordon wrote:
> On 02/02/16 11:06, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>>
>> This is for callers who want micro-second precision but are not
>> waiting from the atomic context.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c  | 3 +--
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h | 9 +++++----
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_psr.c | 2 +-
>>   3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>> index e2bea710614f..fb8a76ec6ade 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c
>> @@ -1788,11 +1788,10 @@ static void wait_panel_status(struct intel_dp
>> *intel_dp,
>>               I915_READ(pp_stat_reg),
>>               I915_READ(pp_ctrl_reg));
>>
>> -    if (_wait_for((I915_READ(pp_stat_reg) & mask) == value, 5000, 10)) {
>> +    if (_wait_for((I915_READ(pp_stat_reg) & mask) == value, 5000000,
>> 10000))
>>           DRM_ERROR("Panel status timeout: status %08x control %08x\n",
>>                   I915_READ(pp_stat_reg),
>>                   I915_READ(pp_ctrl_reg));
>> -    }
>>
>>       DRM_DEBUG_KMS("Wait complete\n");
>>   }
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
>> index f620023ed134..779d17a9fcce 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h
>> @@ -45,8 +45,8 @@
>>    * having timed out, since the timeout could be due to preemption or
>> similar and
>>    * we've never had a chance to check the condition before the timeout.
>>    */
>> -#define _wait_for(COND, MS, W) ({ \
>> -    unsigned long timeout__ = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(MS) + 1;    \
>> +#define _wait_for(COND, US, W) ({ \
>> +    unsigned long timeout__ = jiffies + usecs_to_jiffies(US) + 1;    \
>>       int ret__ = 0;                            \
>>       while (!(COND)) {                        \
>>           if (time_after(jiffies, timeout__)) {            \
>> @@ -55,7 +55,7 @@
>>               break;                        \
>>           }                            \
>>           if ((W) && drm_can_sleep()) {                \
>> -            usleep_range((W)*1000, (W)*2000);        \
>> +            usleep_range((W), (W)*2);            \
>>           } else {                        \
>>               cpu_relax();                    \
>>           }                            \
>> @@ -63,7 +63,8 @@
>>       ret__;                                \
>>   })
>>
>> -#define wait_for(COND, MS) _wait_for(COND, MS, 1)
>> +#define wait_for(COND, MS) _wait_for(COND, (MS) * 1000, 1000)
>> +#define wait_for_us(COND, US) _wait_for(COND, US, 1)
>>   #define wait_for_atomic(COND, MS) _wait_for(COND, MS, 0)
>>   #define wait_for_atomic_us(COND, US) _wait_for((COND), \
>>                              DIV_ROUND_UP((US), 1000), 0)
>
> Don't these latter two macros need to be altered since the underlying
> _wait_for() now takes times in us rather than ms?

Yes you are right, thanks! (Consequence of re-ordering and re-basing.)

Regards,

Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx