On 3/24/22 17:12, Sergey Shtylyov wrote:
> On 3/24/22 4:40 AM, Damien Le Moal wrote:
>
>>> Having greater than (AHCI_MAX_PORTS = 32) ports detected isn't that
>>> critical from the further AHCI-platform initialization point of view since
>>> exceeding the ports upper limit will cause allocating more resources than
>>> will be used afterwards. But detecting too many child DT-nodes doesn't
>>> seem right since it's very unlikely to have it on an ordinary platform. In
>>> accordance with the AHCI specification there can't be more than 32 ports
>>> implemented at least due to having the CAP.NP field of 4 bits wide and the
>>> PI register of dword size. Thus if such situation is found the DTB must
>>> have been corrupted and the data read from it shouldn't be reliable. Let's
>>> consider that as an erroneous situation and halt further resources
>>> allocation.
>>>
>>> Note it's logically more correct to have the nports set only after the
>>> initialization value is checked for being sane. So while at it let's make
>>> sure nports is assigned with a correct value.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/ata/libahci_platform.c | 16 +++++++++++-----
>>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/ata/libahci_platform.c b/drivers/ata/libahci_platform.c
>>> index 4fb9629c03ab..845042295b97 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/ata/libahci_platform.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/ata/libahci_platform.c
>>> @@ -470,15 +470,21 @@ struct ahci_host_priv *ahci_platform_get_resources(struct platform_device *pdev,
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>> - hpriv->nports = child_nodes = of_get_child_count(dev->of_node);
>>> -
>>> /*
>>> - * If no sub-node was found, we still need to set nports to
>>> - * one in order to be able to use the
>>> + * Too many sub-nodes most likely means having something wrong with
>>> + * firmware. If no sub-node was found, we still need to set nports
>>> + * to one in order to be able to use the
>>> * ahci_platform_[en|dis]able_[phys|regulators] functions.
>>> */
>>> - if (!child_nodes)
>>> + child_nodes = of_get_child_count(dev->of_node);
>>> + if (child_nodes > AHCI_MAX_PORTS) {
>>> + rc = -EINVAL;
>>> + goto err_out;
>>> + } else if (!child_nodes) {
>>
>> No need for "else" after a return.
>
> You meant *goto*? :-)
Yes :) No need for the else after goto.
>
> [...]
>
> MBR, Sergey
--
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research
