-
由 Daniel Vetter 提交于
So apparently jiffies<->nsec<->ktime isn't accurate or something. At elast if we timeout there's occasionally still a few hundred us left (in a 2 second timeout). Stuff I've tried and thrown out again: - Sampling the before timestamp before jiffies. Doesn't improve test path rate at all. - Using jiffies. Way to inaccurate, which means way too much drift with signals plus automatic ioctl restarting in userspace. In hindsight we should have used an absolute timeout, but hey we need something for v3 of the i915 gem wait interfaces ;-) - Trying to figure out where accuracy gets lost. gl testcase really don't care all that much about this (as long as isn't not massively off), it's just that the testcase gets a bit upset if it receives an EITME with timeout > 0. So as long as we're in the ballbark it's good enough. So patch everything up if we're at most one jiffies off. I get's me a solid test again. This regression is probably introduced in commit 5ed0bdf2 Author: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Date: Wed Jul 16 21:05:06 2014 +0000 drm: i915: Use nsec based interfaces Use ktime_get_raw_ns() and get rid of the back and forth timespec conversions. Signed-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Acked-by: NDaniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> Signed-off-by: NJohn Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org> Probably because I'm too lazy to confirm myself and still waiting for QA ;-) Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=82749Signed-off-by: NDaniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com> Signed-off-by: NJani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
9cca3068