From 8fddfb39a4791b3698e4e584681691567a276898 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jia-Ju Bai Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2018 20:57:56 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] platform: x86: intel_scu_ipc: Replace mdelay with usleep_range in intel_scu_ipc_i2c_cntrl intel_scu_ipc_i2c_cntrl() calls mutex_lock(), which indicates this function is not called in atomic context. Despite never getting called from atomic context, intel_scu_ipc_i2c_cntrl() calls mdelay to busily wait. This is not necessary and can be replaced with usleep_range to avoid busy waiting. This is found by a static analysis tool named DCNS written by myself. And I also manually check it. Signed-off-by: Jia-Ju Bai Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko --- drivers/platform/x86/intel_scu_ipc.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel_scu_ipc.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel_scu_ipc.c index 2c85f75e32b0..75c8fef7a482 100644 --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel_scu_ipc.c +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel_scu_ipc.c @@ -584,11 +584,11 @@ int intel_scu_ipc_i2c_cntrl(u32 addr, u32 *data) if (cmd == IPC_I2C_READ) { writel(addr, scu->i2c_base + IPC_I2C_CNTRL_ADDR); /* Write not getting updated without delay */ - mdelay(1); + usleep_range(1000, 2000); *data = readl(scu->i2c_base + I2C_DATA_ADDR); } else if (cmd == IPC_I2C_WRITE) { writel(*data, scu->i2c_base + I2C_DATA_ADDR); - mdelay(1); + usleep_range(1000, 2000); writel(addr, scu->i2c_base + IPC_I2C_CNTRL_ADDR); } else { dev_err(scu->dev, -- 2.11.0