[PATCH linux dev-6.18 v1] eeprom: at25: fix read_poll_timeout() arg order

[Ninad Palsule <ninad@linux.ibm.com>]

The arguments to read_poll_timeout() in at25_wait_ready() are in the
wrong order. "false" is passed as sleep_us, while the macro expects
sleep_us, timeout_us and sleep_before_read in that order.

This makes the loop busy-poll instead of sleeping 1 ms between reads,
and shortens the timeout from EE_TIMEOUT ms to 1 ms, so the wait can
fail early.

Pass USEC_PER_MSEC as sleep_us, USEC_PER_MSEC * EE_TIMEOUT as
timeout_us, and false as sleep_before_read.

Signed-off-by: Ninad Palsule <ninad@linux.ibm.com>
---
 drivers/misc/eeprom/at25.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/misc/eeprom/at25.c b/drivers/misc/eeprom/at25.c
index e2868f7bdb03..df8daa40b0e1 100644
--- a/drivers/misc/eeprom/at25.c
+++ b/drivers/misc/eeprom/at25.c
@@ -209,9 +209,9 @@ static int at25_wait_ready(struct at25_data *at25)
 					   SPI_MEM_OP_DATA_IN(1, bounce, 1));
 
 	read_poll_timeout(spi_mem_exec_op, status,
-			  status || !(bounce[0] & AT25_SR_nRDY), false,
+			  status || !(bounce[0] & AT25_SR_nRDY),
 			  USEC_PER_MSEC, USEC_PER_MSEC * EE_TIMEOUT,
-			  at25->spimem, &op);
+			  false, at25->spimem, &op);
 	if (status < 0)
 		return status;
 	if (!(bounce[0] & AT25_SR_nRDY))
-- 
2.53.0