On 2/03/21 9:01 am, Avri Altman wrote:
>
>> If ufshcd_probe_hba() fails it sets ufshcd_state to UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR,
>> however, if it is called again, as it is within a loop in
>> ufshcd_reset_and_restore(), and succeeds, then it will not set the state
>> back to UFSHCD_STATE_OPERATIONAL unless the state was
>> UFSHCD_STATE_RESET.
>>
>> That can result in the state being UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR even though
>> ufshcd_reset_and_restore() is successful and returns zero.
>>
>> Fix by initializing the state to UFSHCD_STATE_RESET in the start of each
>> loop in ufshcd_reset_and_restore(). If there is an error,
>> ufshcd_reset_and_restore() will change the state to UFSHCD_STATE_ERROR,
>> otherwise ufshcd_probe_hba() will have set the state appropriately.
>>
>> Fixes: 4db7a2360597 ("scsi: ufs: Fix concurrency of error handler and other
>> error recovery paths")
>> Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx>
> I think that CanG recent series addressed that issue as well, can you take a look?
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1614145010-36079-2-git-send-email-cang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Yes, there it is mixed in with other changes. However it is probably better
as a separate patch. Can Guo, what do you think?
>
>
>> ---
>> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 2 ++
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>> index 77161750c9fb..91a403afe038 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
>> @@ -7031,6 +7031,8 @@ static int ufshcd_reset_and_restore(struct ufs_hba
>> *hba)
>> spin_unlock_irqrestore(hba->host->host_lock, flags);
>>
>> do {
>> + hba->ufshcd_state = UFSHCD_STATE_RESET;
>> +
>> /* Reset the attached device */
>> ufshcd_device_reset(hba);
>>
>> --
>> 2.17.1
>
