linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: qlge: replace msleep with usleep

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <YrlKVg7ZN9yhTOvt@kroah.com>
Date:   Mon, 27 Jun 2022 08:12:38 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Arun Vijayshankar <arunvijayshankar@...il.com>
Cc:     manishc@...vell.com, GR-Linux-NIC-Dev@...vell.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: qlge: replace msleep with usleep_range

On Sun, Jun 26, 2022 at 09:53:33PM -0700, Arun Vijayshankar wrote:
> qlge_close uses msleep for 1ms, in which case (1 - 20ms) it is preferable
> to use usleep_range in non-atomic contexts, as documented in
> Documentation/timers/timers-howto.rst. A range of 1 - 1.05ms is
> specified here, in case the device takes slightly longer than 1ms to recover from
> reset.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Arun Vijayshankar <arunvijayshankar@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/qlge/qlge_main.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/qlge/qlge_main.c b/drivers/staging/qlge/qlge_main.c
> index 689a87d58f27..3cc4f1902c80 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/qlge/qlge_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/qlge/qlge_main.c
> @@ -3886,7 +3886,7 @@ static int qlge_close(struct net_device *ndev)
>  	 * (Rarely happens, but possible.)
>  	 */
>  	while (!test_bit(QL_ADAPTER_UP, &qdev->flags))
> -		msleep(1);
> +		usleep_range(1000, 1050);

Have you tested this with a device?  Doing these types of changes
without access to the hardware isn't a good idea.

Also, a loop that has the chance to never end should be fixed up, don't
you think?

thanks,

greg k-h