On 10/10/22 02:29, Bean Huo wrote:
From: Bean Huo <beanhuo@xxxxxxxxxx>
LUs with WB potential support are properly checked in ufshcd_wb_probe()
before calling ufshcd_read_unit_desc_param(), so remove this unnecessary
if-checkup in ufs_is_valid_unit_desc_lun() to match its function definition.
Signed-off-by: Bean Huo <beanhuo@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h | 3 ---
1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h
index f68ca33f6ac7..2457b005101a 100644
--- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h
+++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd-priv.h
@@ -300,9 +300,6 @@ static inline bool ufs_is_valid_unit_desc_lun(struct ufs_dev_info *dev_info,
pr_err("Max General LU supported by UFS isn't initialized\n");
return false;
}
- /* WB is available only for the logical unit from 0 to 7 */
- if (param_offset == UNIT_DESC_PARAM_WB_BUF_ALLOC_UNITS)
- return lun < UFS_UPIU_MAX_WB_LUN_ID;
return lun == UFS_UPIU_RPMB_WLUN || (lun < dev_info->max_lu_supported);
}
Hi Bean,
I think the above patch reintroduces the stack overflow issue fixed by
commit a2fca52ee640 ("scsi: ufs: WB is only available on LUN #0 to #7").
How about reverting commit a2fca52ee640 and fixing the stack overflow
issue in another way than by modifying ufs_is_valid_unit_desc_lun()?
Thanks,
Bart.
