linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 3/7] ata: libahci: allow to use multiple PHYs

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 9 Jul 2014 09:59:10 -0400
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Antoine Ténart 
	<antoine.tenart@...e-electrons.com>
Cc:	sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com, kishon@...com,
	alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com,
	thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com, zmxu@...vell.com,
	jszhang@...vell.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 3/7] ata: libahci: allow to use multiple PHYs

Hello,

On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 10:23:31AM +0200, Antoine Ténart wrote:
> > It is confusing.  If you wanna pass around available ports in hpriv,
> > please add a separate field and replace the arguments to
> > save_initial_config().
> 
> I don't get it. Which argument should I replace in
> save_initial_config()? The change is we compute hpriv->port_map.
> I don't see which arguments we can add or replace.

The @force_port_map and @mask_port_map of ahci_save_initial_config().
We end up with three params from two places modifying port_map and one
of those is in/out parameter, so ummm, no.  If you wanna add port
masking to @hpriv, please do it by moving @force_port_map and
@mask_port_map into @hpriv instead.

Sure, the proposed change is small but the end result is messy.

> I had a quick look on this, and it does not seems to be that simple. The
> ahci_port_priv is stored inside the ata_port struct and not accessible
> (as of now) from the ahci_host_priv one. The ahci_port_priv is
> initialized at the end of ahci_platform_init_host(), far after we need
> it. This requires quite a lot of changes. Or is there another way?

Yeah, it'd probably need separating out port resource handling, so
that the order is get_resources, host_alloc, get_port_resources and
then init and activate.  Hans, what do you think?

> To be honest, we are now at v9 and it's been quite a long time since v1.
> I'd really like it to be merged in 3.17. As I see it, this patch keeps
> the same logic as what was in place before, only with more PHYs.
> 
> Don't take me wrong, I really think this is a good idea to have a
> per-port PHY information. But this is a refactoring not clearly related
> to this series as the logic is not changed. This definitively can be the
> subject of a dedicated series, especially if I got it right and the
> required modifications are not that obvious.

Heh, I get that but, at the same time, this is the point where you're
most motivated to actually work on it.  :)

Let's see how much work it's gonna be.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/