[PATCH 5/5] reservation: revert "wait only with non-zero timeout specified (v3)" v2

[Alex Deucher]

On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 8:07 PM, Gustavo Padovan <gustavo at padovan.org> wrote:
> Hi Christian,
>
> 2016-10-20 Christian König <deathsimple at vodafone.de>:
>
>> From: Christian König <christian.koenig at amd.com>
>>
>> This reverts commit fb8b7d2b9d80e1e71f379e57355936bd2b024be9.
>>
>> Otherwise signaling might never be activated on the fences. This can
>> result in infinite waiting with hardware which has unreliable interrupts.
>>
>> v2: still return one when the timeout is zero and we don't have any fences.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig at amd.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Chunming Zhou <david1.zhou at amd.com> (v1)
>> ---
>>  drivers/dma-buf/reservation.c | 5 +----
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> Reviewed-by: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan at collabora.co.uk>

I've rebased these patches based on the fence renaming in drm-next.
Should I pull these in through my tree or should they go in through
drm-misc or the dma-buf tree?  If the later, I'll send out the rebased
patches.

Alex