Even the kerneldoc says that with a zero timeout the function should not
wait for anything, but still return 1 to indicate that the fences are
signaled now.
Unfortunately that isn't what was implemented, instead of only returning
1 we also waited for at least one jiffies.
Fix that by adjusting the handling to what the function is actually
documented to do.
Reported-by: Marek Olšák <marek.ol...@amd.com>
Reported-by: Lucas Stach <l.st...@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koe...@amd.com>
Cc: <sta...@vger.kernel.org>
---
drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c | 11 ++++++-----
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c
index 5f8d010516f0..ae92d9d2394d 100644
--- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c
+++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c
@@ -684,11 +684,12 @@ long dma_resv_wait_timeout(struct dma_resv *obj, enum
dma_resv_usage usage,
dma_resv_iter_begin(&cursor, obj, usage);
dma_resv_for_each_fence_unlocked(&cursor, fence) {
- ret = dma_fence_wait_timeout(fence, intr, ret);
- if (ret <= 0) {
- dma_resv_iter_end(&cursor);
- return ret;
- }
+ ret = dma_fence_wait_timeout(fence, intr, timeout);
+ if (ret <= 0)
+ break;
+
+ /* Even for zero timeout the return value is 1 */
+ timeout = min(timeout, ret);
}
dma_resv_iter_end(&cursor);
--
2.34.1
