[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170522203818.GG8541@lahna.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2017 23:38:18 +0300
From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To: Andreas Noever <andreas.noever@...il.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Michael Jamet <michael.jamet@...el.com>,
Yehezkel Bernat <yehezkel.bernat@...el.com>,
Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>,
Amir Levy <amir.jer.levy@...el.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Mario.Limonciello@...l.com,
Jared.Dominguez@...l.com,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/24] thunderbolt: Do not try to read UID if DROM offset
is read as 0
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 08:41:22PM +0200, Andreas Noever wrote:
> Yes there is a check for the root switch, but also one that checks the
> return code of tb_drom_read_uid_only :)
>
> err = tb_drom_read_uid_only(sw, &uid);
> if (err) {
> tb_sw_warn(sw, "uid read failed\n");
> return err;
> }
> if (sw != sw->tb->root_switch && sw->uid != uid) {
>
>
> The reason it works on the Mac is because drom_offset is not 0, so the
> new branch in tb_drom_read_uid_only is not taken. Probably this is the
> case for all Cactus Ridge models and Alpine Ridge doesn't go there
> since it uses the ICM?
Yes in case of ICM we don't call the function at all.
> Still it wouldn't hurt to only read the uid if
> sw != root_switch, the value is not used if sw == root_switch.
I agree. I'll update the code so that it will only read and check UID
when we are not dealing with the root switch.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists