Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Handle full s64 precision for wait-ioctl

2017-08-11 Thread Joonas Lahtinen
On la, 2017-08-05 at 20:47 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Chris Wilson (2017-08-05 20:19:24) > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h > > @@ -4144,6 +4144,12 @@ static inline unsigned long > > msecs_to_jiffies_timeout(const unsigned int m) > >   > >  static inline unsigned long nsecs_to_

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Handle full s64 precision for wait-ioctl

2017-08-11 Thread Joonas Lahtinen
On la, 2017-08-05 at 20:19 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > The wait-ioctl is optionally supplied a timeout with nanosecond > precision in a s64 field. We use nsecs_to_jiffies64() to convert that > into the jiffies consumed by the scheduler, but internally > nsecs_to_jiffies64() does not guard against

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Handle full s64 precision for wait-ioctl

2017-08-05 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Chris Wilson (2017-08-05 20:19:24) > The wait-ioctl is optionally supplied a timeout with nanosecond > precision in a s64 field. We use nsecs_to_jiffies64() to convert that > into the jiffies consumed by the scheduler, but internally > nsecs_to_jiffies64() does not guard against overflow (a

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Handle full s64 precision for wait-ioctl

2017-08-05 Thread Chris Wilson
The wait-ioctl is optionally supplied a timeout with nanosecond precision in a s64 field. We use nsecs_to_jiffies64() to convert that into the jiffies consumed by the scheduler, but internally nsecs_to_jiffies64() does not guard against overflow (as it's purpose is for use by the scheduler and not