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]

Message-ID: <53BD4B92.7030601@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 09 Jul 2014 16:02:58 +0200
From:	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	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
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 3/7] ata: libahci: allow to use multiple PHYs

Hi,

On 07/09/2014 03:59 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> 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?

The order (and function names) you're suggesting here sound good to me.

Regards,

Hans
--
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/