linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] rtw88: Use udelay instead of usleep in atomic context

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

Date:   Thu, 23 Apr 2020 14:53:18 +0800
From:   Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>
To:     Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     Tony Chuang <yhchuang@...ltek.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "open list:REALTEK WIRELESS DRIVER (rtw88)" 
        <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:NETWORKING DRIVERS" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rtw88: Use udelay instead of usleep in atomic context



> On Apr 23, 2020, at 14:49, Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org> wrote:
> 
> Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com> writes:
> 
>> It's incorrect to use usleep in atomic context.
>> 
>> Switch to a macro which uses udelay instead of usleep to prevent the issue.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>
> 
> This fixes a regression, right? So there should be a Fixes line.

Yes, but the regression commit isn't in Linus' tree, so the sha1 may change.

Kai-Heng

> 
> Also I can't take this until patch 1 is in my tree. And I don't know who
> takes iopoll.h patches.
> 
> -- 
> https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches