[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Zcukjucb4VEbKK9x@x1-carbon>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2024 18:19:10 +0100
From: Niklas Cassel <cassel@...nel.org>
To: Andrey Melnikov <temnota.am@...il.com>
Cc: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...il.com>, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dlemoal@...nel.org,
hdegoede@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ahci: asm1064: correct count of reported ports
On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 10:27:11AM +0300, Andrey Melnikov wrote:
> > On 2/7/24 12:58 PM, Andrey Jr. Melnikov wrote:
> >
> > > The ASM1064 SATA host controller always reports wrongly,
> > > that it has 24 ports. But in reality, it only has four ports.
> > >
> > > before:
> > > ahci 0000:04:00.0: SSS flag set, parallel bus scan disabled
> > > ahci 0000:04:00.0: AHCI 0001.0301 32 slots 24 ports 6 Gbps 0xffff0f impl SATA mode
> > > ahci 0000:04:00.0: flags: 64bit ncq sntf stag pm led only pio sxs deso sadm sds apst
> > >
> > > after:
> > > ahci 0000:04:00.0: ASM1064 has only four ports
> > > ahci 0000:04:00.0: forcing port_map 0xffff0f -> 0xf
> > > ahci 0000:04:00.0: SSS flag set, parallel bus scan disabled
> > > ahci 0000:04:00.0: AHCI 0001.0301 32 slots 24 ports 6 Gbps 0xf impl SATA mode
> > > ahci 0000:04:00.0: flags: 64bit ncq sntf stag pm led only pio sxs deso sadm sds apst
> > >
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Jr. Melnikov <temnota.am@...il.com>
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/ata/ahci.c b/drivers/ata/ahci.c
> > > index da2e74fce2d9..ec30d8330d16 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/ata/ahci.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/ata/ahci.c
> > > @@ -671,9 +671,14 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(mobile_lpm_policy, "Default LPM policy for mobile chipsets");
> > > static void ahci_pci_save_initial_config(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> > > struct ahci_host_priv *hpriv)
> > > {
> > > - if (pdev->vendor == PCI_VENDOR_ID_ASMEDIA && pdev->device == 0x1166) {
> > > - dev_info(&pdev->dev, "ASM1166 has only six ports\n");
> > > - hpriv->saved_port_map = 0x3f;
> > > + if (pdev->vendor == PCI_VENDOR_ID_ASMEDIA) {
> > > + if (pdev->device == 0x1166) {
> >
> > Maybe *switch* instead?
>
> Ok.
Hello Andrey,
do you intend to send out a v2 that uses a switch instead?
And perhaps take Damien's patch as patch 1/2
(with Suggested-by: Damien ... of course),
so that the before/after print in your commit message shows
the override value.
Kind regards,
Niklas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists