[v2,2/2] rtw88: Use udelay instead of usleep in atomic context
diff mbox series

Message ID 20200423073007.3566-1-kai.heng.feng@canonical.com
State Accepted
Commit fd5d781964b05ab586e690923dba6eca3cc16723
Delegated to: Kalle Valo
Headers show
Series
  • Untitled series #275903
Related show

Commit Message

Kai-Heng Feng April 23, 2020, 7:30 a.m. UTC
It's incorrect to use usleep in atomic context.

Switch to a macro which uses udelay instead of usleep to prevent the issue.

Fixes: 6343a6d4b213 ("rtw88: Add delay on polling h2c command status bit")
Signed-off-by: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com>
---
v2:
 - Add Fixes tag.

 drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/fw.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Comments

Kalle Valo April 23, 2020, 4:07 p.m. UTC | #1
Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com> wrote:

> It's incorrect to use usleep in atomic context.
> 
> Switch to a macro which uses udelay instead of usleep to prevent the issue.
> 
> Fixes: 6343a6d4b213 ("rtw88: Add delay on polling h2c command status bit")
> Signed-off-by: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com>

For patch 1 please also CC linux-wireless, otherwise patchwork cannot see it.
Kalle Valo May 6, 2020, 8:31 a.m. UTC | #2
Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com> wrote:

> It's incorrect to use usleep in atomic context.
> 
> Switch to a macro which uses udelay instead of usleep to prevent the issue.
> 
> Fixes: 6343a6d4b213 ("rtw88: Add delay on polling h2c command status bit")
> Signed-off-by: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com>

Patch applied to wireless-drivers-next.git, thanks.

fd5d781964b0 rtw88: Use udelay instead of usleep in atomic context

Patch
diff mbox series

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/fw.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/fw.c
index 245da96dfddc..8f998b4a7234 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/fw.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/fw.c
@@ -228,9 +228,9 @@  static void rtw_fw_send_h2c_command(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev,
 		goto out;
 	}
 
-	ret = read_poll_timeout(rtw_read8, box_state,
-				!((box_state >> box) & 0x1), 100, 3000, false,
-				rtwdev, REG_HMETFR);
+	ret = read_poll_timeout_atomic(rtw_read8, box_state,
+				       !((box_state >> box) & 0x1), 100, 3000,
+				       false, rtwdev, REG_HMETFR);
 
 	if (ret) {
 		rtw_err(rtwdev, "failed to send h2c command\n");