From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> in_interrupt() is ill defined and does not provide what the name suggests. The usage especially in driver code is deprecated and a tree wide effort to clean up and consolidate the (ab)usage of in_interrupt() and related checks is happening. In this case the check covers only parts of the contexts in which these functions cannot be called. It fails to detect preemption or interrupt disabled invocations. As the functions which are invoked from ionic_adminq_post() and ionic_dev_cmd_wait() contain a broad variety of checks (always enabled or debug option dependent) which cover all invalid conditions already, there is no point in having inconsistent warnings in those drivers. Just remove them. Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Acked-by: Shannon Nelson <snelson@xxxxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/net/ethernet/pensando/ionic/ionic_main.c | 4 ---- 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-) --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/pensando/ionic/ionic_main.c +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/pensando/ionic/ionic_main.c @@ -255,8 +255,6 @@ static int ionic_adminq_post(struct ioni struct ionic_queue *q; int err = 0; - WARN_ON(in_interrupt()); - if (!lif->adminqcq) return -EIO; @@ -328,8 +326,6 @@ int ionic_dev_cmd_wait(struct ionic *ion int done; int err; - WARN_ON(in_interrupt()); - /* Wait for dev cmd to complete, retrying if we get EAGAIN, * but don't wait any longer than max_seconds. */
