[reSIProcate] AbstractFifo::getNext(int)

[Kenneth Ho]

Guys,

A previous commit of mine on trunk resulted a block condition in 
DialogUsageManager::process().

The cause was a Fifo::getNext(0), which would be blocked until there is 
a message. I've re-commited (after the revert from scott) my previous 
patch but used 1 instead of 0 as the timeout.

But I am not sure if this is the right semantics. The question is, is 
Fifo::getNext(0) supposed to be blocking?

On the branch I am working on mostly, Fifo::getNext(0) is a nonblocking 
call if it's empty. I failed to find useful log (due to re-org) to find 
out when and why the semantics diverted.

Nash,

The revert you did was unnecessary, since Fifo::getNext(0) wouldn't 
block on our branch.

Ken