netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/3] 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 31 Oct 2022 17:50:46 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     drake@...ketalley.com
Cc:     Manish Chopra <manishc@...vell.com>, GR-Linux-NIC-Dev@...vell.com,
        Coiby Xu <coiby.xu@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] staging: qlge: replace msleep with usleep_range

On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 10:25:15AM -0400, drake@...ketalley.com wrote:
> From: Drake Talley <drake@...ketalley.com>
> 
> Since msleep may delay for up to 20ms, usleep_range is recommended for
> short durations in the docs linked in the below warning.  I set the
> range to 1000-2000 based on looking at other usages of usleep_range.
> 
> Reported by checkpatch:
> 
> WARNING: msleep < 20ms can sleep for up to 20ms; see Documentation/timers/timers-howto.rst
> 
> Signed-off-by: Drake Talley <drake@...ketalley.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 8c1fdd8ebba0..c8403dbb5bad 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/qlge/qlge_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/qlge/qlge_main.c
> @@ -3890,7 +3890,7 @@ 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, 2000);

Please see the mailing list archives for why making this type of change
without the hardware to test it is not a good idea.

sorry,

greg k-h