From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Gleixner Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 22:25:32 +0200 Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [patch V2 23/36] net: usb: net1080: Remove in_interrupt() comment References: <20200929202509.673358734@linutronix.de> Message-ID: <20200929203501.797721723@linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org List-ID: From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior The comment above nc_vendor_write() suggests that the function could become async so that is usable in `in_interrupt()' context or that it already is safe to be called from such a context. Eitherway: The function did not become async since v2.4.9.2 (2002) and it must be not be called from `in_interrupt()' context because it sleeps on mutltiple occations. Remove the misleading comment. Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner --- drivers/net/usb/net1080.c | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) --- a/drivers/net/usb/net1080.c +++ b/drivers/net/usb/net1080.c @@ -113,7 +113,6 @@ nc_register_read(struct usbnet *dev, u8 return nc_vendor_read(dev, REQUEST_REGISTER, regnum, retval_ptr); } -// no retval ... can become async, usable in_interrupt() static void nc_vendor_write(struct usbnet *dev, u8 req, u8 regnum, u16 value) {