[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87y3kkr436.fsf@purkki.adurom.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 18:13:01 +0200
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
To: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@...il.com>
Cc: zajec5@...il.com, hauke@...ke-m.de, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bcma: Replace mdelay with usleep_range in bcma_pmu_resources_init
Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@...il.com> writes:
> After checking all possible call chains to bcma_pmu_resources_init() here,
> my tool finds that this function is never called in atomic context,
> namely never in an interrupt handler or holding a spinlock.
> Thus mdelay can be replaced with usleep_range to avoid busy wait.
>
> This is found by a static analysis tool named DCNS written by myself.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@...il.com>
> ---
> drivers/bcma/driver_chipcommon_pmu.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/bcma/driver_chipcommon_pmu.c b/drivers/bcma/driver_chipcommon_pmu.c
> index f1eb4d3..478948c 100644
> --- a/drivers/bcma/driver_chipcommon_pmu.c
> +++ b/drivers/bcma/driver_chipcommon_pmu.c
> @@ -203,7 +203,7 @@ static void bcma_pmu_resources_init(struct bcma_drv_cc *cc)
> * Add some delay; allow resources to come up and settle.
> * Delay is required for SoC (early init).
> */
> - mdelay(2);
> + usleep_range(1500, 2000);
I would like to have an ack from someone familiar with bcma before I
apply this.
--
Kalle Valo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists