4.9-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Nayna Jain <na...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

commit 0afb7118ae021e80ecf70f5a3336e0935505518a upstream.

Currently, there is an unnecessary 1 msec delay added in
i2c_nuvoton_write_status() for the successful case. This
function is called multiple times during send() and recv(),
which implies adding multiple extra delays for every TPM
operation.

This patch calls usleep_range() only if retry is to be done.

Signed-off-by: Nayna Jain <na...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Mimi Zohar <zo...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakki...@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakki...@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org>

---
 drivers/char/tpm/tpm_i2c_nuvoton.c |    5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_i2c_nuvoton.c
+++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_i2c_nuvoton.c
@@ -124,8 +124,9 @@ static s32 i2c_nuvoton_write_status(stru
        /* this causes the current command to be aborted */
        for (i = 0, status = -1; i < TPM_I2C_RETRY_COUNT && status < 0; i++) {
                status = i2c_nuvoton_write_buf(client, TPM_STS, 1, &data);
-               usleep_range(TPM_I2C_BUS_DELAY, TPM_I2C_BUS_DELAY
-                            + TPM_I2C_DELAY_RANGE);
+               if (status < 0)
+                       usleep_range(TPM_I2C_BUS_DELAY, TPM_I2C_BUS_DELAY
+                                    + TPM_I2C_DELAY_RANGE);
        }
        return status;
 }


Reply via email to