| Message ID | 1346565590-1760-2-git-send-email-ben@bwidawsk.net (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h index 95f635b..1707de5 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h @@ -41,7 +41,11 @@ ret__ = -ETIMEDOUT; \ break; \ } \ - if (W && drm_can_sleep()) msleep(W); \ + if (W && drm_can_sleep()) { \ + msleep(W); \ + } else { \ + cpu_relax(); \ + } \ } \ ret__; \ })
As part of the advice given to us from the hardware designers regarding the maximum wait time on the forcewake handshake we need to move from us granularity to ms granularity. In earlier patches to do this, Jani noticed that wait_for_us was properly converted to use cpu_relax(), but wait_for was not. The issue has existed since the introduction of the macro: commit 913d8d110078788c14812dce8bb62c37946821d2 Author: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Date: Sat Aug 7 11:01:35 2010 +0100 drm/i915: Ensure that while(INREG()) are bounded (v2) CC: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h | 6 +++++- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)