scsi: qla4xxx: Remove in_interrupt() from qla4_82xx_rom_lock()

qla4_82xx_rom_lock() spins on a certain hardware state until it is
updated. At the end of each spin, if in_interrupt() is true, it does 20
loops of cpu_relax(). Otherwise, it yields the CPU.

While in_interrupt() is ill-defined and does not provide what the name
suggests, it is not needed here: qla4_82xx_rom_lock() is always called
from process context. Below is an analysis of its callers:

  - ql4_nx.c: qla4_82xx_rom_fast_read(), all process context callers:
    => ql4_nx.c: qla4_82xx_pinit_from_rom(), GFP_KERNEL allocation
    => ql4_nx.c: qla4_82xx_load_from_flash(), msleep() in a loop

  - ql4_nx.c: qla4_82xx_pinit_from_rom(), earlier discussed

  - ql4_nx.c: qla4_82xx_rom_lock_recovery(), bound to "isp_operations"
    ->rom_lock_recovery() hook, which has one process context caller,
    qla4_8xxx_device_bootstrap(), with callers:
      => ql4_83xx.c: qla4_83xx_need_reset_handler(), process, msleep()
      => ql4_nx.c: qla4_8xxx_device_state_handler(), multiple msleep()s

  - ql4_nx.c: qla4_82xx_read_flash_data(), has cond_resched()

Remove the in_interrupt() check. Mark, qla4_82xx_rom_lock(), and the
->rom_lock_recovery() hook, with "Context: task, can sleep".

Change qla4_82xx_rom_lock() implementation to sleep 20ms, instead of a
schedule(), for each spin. This is more deterministic, and it matches
the other implementations bound to ->rom_lock_recovery().

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Cc: Nilesh Javali <[email protected]>
Cc: Manish Rangankar <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Wagner <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ahmed S. Darwish <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Martin K. Petersen <[email protected]>

0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions