On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 05:23:33PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 6/10/22 17:17, Serge Semin 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 5 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>
> > Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxx>
> >
> > ---
> >
> > Changelog v2:
> > - Drop the else word from the child_nodes value checking if-else-if
> > statement (@Damien) and convert the after-else part into the ternary
> > operator-based statement.
> >
> > Changelog v4:
> > - Fix some logical mistakes in the patch log. (@Sergei Shtylyov)
> > ---
> > drivers/ata/libahci_platform.c | 13 ++++++++++---
> > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/ata/libahci_platform.c b/drivers/ata/libahci_platform.c
> > index 814804582d1d..8aed7b29c7ab 100644
> > --- a/drivers/ata/libahci_platform.c
> > +++ b/drivers/ata/libahci_platform.c
> > @@ -451,15 +451,22 @@ struct ahci_host_priv *ahci_platform_get_resources(struct platform_device *pdev,
> > }
> > }
> >
> > - hpriv->nports = child_nodes = of_get_child_count(dev->of_node);
> > + /*
> > + * Too many sub-nodes most likely means having something wrong with
> > + * the firmware.
> > + */
> > + child_nodes = of_get_child_count(dev->of_node);
> > + if (child_nodes > AHCI_MAX_PORTS) {
> > + rc = -EINVAL;
> > + goto err_out;
> > + }
> >
> > /*
> > * 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)
> > - hpriv->nports = 1;
> > + hpriv->nports = child_nodes ?: 1;
>
> This change is not necessary and makes the code far less easy to read.
elaborate please. What change? What part of this change makes the code
less easy to read?
-Sergey
>
> >
> > hpriv->phys = devm_kcalloc(dev, hpriv->nports, sizeof(*hpriv->phys), GFP_KERNEL);
> > if (!hpriv->phys) {
>
>
> --
> Damien Le Moal
> Western Digital Research
