linux-kernel - [BUG ?] delay always evaluates to 0

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20150612165829.GA22474@opentech.at>
Date:	Fri, 12 Jun 2015 18:58:29 +0200
From:	Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@...r.at>
To:	Stanislav Yakovlev <stas.yakovlev@...il.com>
Cc:	Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
	James Ketrenos <jketreno@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [BUG ?] delay always evaluates to 0

Hi !

commit 2c86c275015c ("Add ipw2100 wireless driver.") introduced

drivers/net/wireless/ipw2100.c - line-numbers are from next-20150511
1410 static int ipw2100_hw_phy_off(struct ipw2100_priv *priv)
1411 {
1412 
1413 #define HW_PHY_OFF_LOOP_DELAY (HZ / 5000)                                  
1414    
...
1437 
1438                 schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(HW_PHY_OFF_LOOP_DELAY);
1439         }

but (HZ / 5000) will evaluate to 0 for all configurable HZ values - typo ?
and this schedule_timeout_uninterruptible() is probably not doing what
is intended.

thx!
hofrat
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/