[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/guc: Do not use wait_for_atomic in host2guc_action

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>

host2guc_action does not appear to be called from atomic context
so a more polite wait_for macro should be used. Especially since
the timeout is 10ms.

Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
Reported-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak at intel.com>
Cc: Dave Gordon <david.s.gordon at intel.com>
Cc: Imre Deak <imre.deak at intel.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
index 355b6475e74c..fcc7982f8141 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ static int host2guc_action(struct intel_guc *guc, u32 *data, u32 len)
 	I915_WRITE(HOST2GUC_INTERRUPT, HOST2GUC_TRIGGER);
 
 	/* No HOST2GUC command should take longer than 10ms */
-	ret = wait_for_atomic(host2guc_action_response(dev_priv, &status), 10);
+	ret = wait_for(host2guc_action_response(dev_priv, &status), 10);
 	if (status != GUC2HOST_STATUS_SUCCESS) {
 		/*
 		 * Either the GuC explicitly returned an error (which
-- 
1.9.1