linux-kernel - Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: compute wait

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CALAqxLXbb-K0VrEKXFMe2gtvSt0+Aur=oSD9EuBBY0xLjOMUCw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 4 Dec 2014 12:35:44 -0800
From:	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To:	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>
Cc:	Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
	Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: compute wait_ioctl timeout correctly

On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 7:16 PM, John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 6:42 PM, John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org> wrote:
>>>> Sigh. So you're going to make me write a separate patch that moves it over?
>>>
>>> We've written it already, Imre posted the link to the old discussion:
>>>
>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/5/10/187
>>>
>>> But if the first attempt doesn't sufficiently stick I tend to chase
>>> the patches any more. But if you want to resurrect this I could ping
>>> Imre and ask him to pick it up again or you could rebase his patches.
>>
>> Well, last I saw the initial patch was buggy, no? I don't think I saw
>> it being resubmitted.
>
> I didn't see your reply in that thread nor in the v2 follow up at
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=136854294730957&w=2 Maybe I missed
> it, but response seems to have been lukewarm overall.

Ok, I wasn't cc'ed on the v2, thanks for the pointer.  There's some
general lukewarmness to all things jiffies, since getting rid of them
has been a long term goal forever. But overall that patch set seemed
ok (though I'm not a fan of macro generation of functions). But minor
details..

thanks
-john
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/