[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <D2ACB475-AE1A-41D1-BEB9-1FC30DA13AE8@canonical.com>
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists