Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3] drm/i915: Use atomic waits for short non-atomic ones

2016-06-28 Thread Chris Wilson
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 05:20:43PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > From: Tvrtko Ursulin > > usleep_range is not recommended for waits shorten than 10us. > > Make the wait_for_us use the atomic variant for such waits. > > To do so we need to reimplement the _wait_for_atomic macro to > be safe wit

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3] drm/i915: Use atomic waits for short non-atomic ones

2016-06-28 Thread Tvrtko Ursulin
From: Tvrtko Ursulin usleep_range is not recommended for waits shorten than 10us. Make the wait_for_us use the atomic variant for such waits. To do so we need to reimplement the _wait_for_atomic macro to be safe with regards to preemption and interrupts. v2: Reimplement _wait_for_atomic to be