On Wed, 24 Jan 2018, Sun, Ning wrote:
Please do NOT top post and do NOT include the whole mail header in your
reply.
> >> The function tboot_wait_for_aps is not called in atomic context.
> >> Thus mdelay can be replaced with usleep_range, to reduce busy wait.
> > And how did you establish that it's not called in atomic context?
> >
> It is reported by a static analysis tool written by myself. This tool
> finds that mdelay in tboot_wait_for_aps is not called by holding a
> spinlock or in an interrupt handler, thus mdelay can be replaced.
> It looks like tboot_wait_for_aps(...) is not called in atomic context .
You are both failing to look at the calling context of this. Care to follow
the invocation chain and look at the context?
Thanks,
tglx
