linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] ata: sata_dwc_460ex: use "dmas" DT property to find dma channel

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: <56758F33.20804@candw.ms>
Date:	Sat, 19 Dec 2015 13:09:07 -0400
From:	Julian Margetson <runaway@...dw.ms>
To:	Måns Rullgård <mans@...sr.com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ata: sata_dwc_460ex: use "dmas" DT property to find
 dma channel

On 12/19/2015 1:05 PM, Måns Rullgård wrote:
> Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> writes:
>
>> On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Måns Rullgård <mans@...sr.com> wrote:
>>
>>> OK, I've found something.  The dma setup errors are benign, caused by
>>> the driver calling dmaengine_prep_slave_sg() even for non-dma
>>> operations.
>> I suppose the following is a quick fix to avoid preparing descriptor
>> for non-DMA operations (not tested anyhow)
>>
>> a/drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c
>> +++ b/drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c
>> @@ -1041,6 +1041,9 @@ static void sata_dwc_qc_prep_by_tag(struct
>> ata_queued_cmd *qc, u8 tag)
>>                  __func__, ap->port_no, get_dma_dir_descript(qc->dma_dir),
>>                   qc->n_elem);
>>
>> +       if (!is_slave_direction(qc->dma_dir))
>> +               return;
>> +
>>          desc = dma_dwc_xfer_setup(qc);
>>          if (!desc) {
>>                  dev_err(ap->dev, "%s: dma_dwc_xfer_setup returns NULL\n",
> I already have a better patch sitting here.
>
>>> The real error is the lock recursion that's reported
>>> later.  I wasn't seeing it since I was running a UP non-preempt kernel.
>>> With lock debugging enabled, I get the same error.  This patch should
>>> fix it.
>>> -       spin_lock_irqsave(&ap->host->lock, flags);
>>>          hsdevp->cmd_issued[tag] = cmd_issued;
>>> -       spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ap->host->lock, flags);
>>> +
>> This will create a second empty line, though I don't care it is so minor.
> The patch leaves one blank line before the following block comment.  I
> think it looks better that way.
>

Still can't get the patch applied .

--
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/