On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 07:23:29AM +0200, Olivier Dautricourt wrote:
> If the controller reports HCSPARAMS1.maxports==0 then we can skip the
> whole function: it would fail later after doing a bunch of unnecessary
> stuff. It can occur on a buggy hardware (the value is driven by external
> signals).
What "buggy hardware" is this that can not pass the USB testing for this
type of issue?
>
> Signed-off-by: Olivier Dautricourt <olivierdautricourt@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/usb/host/xhci-mem.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/xhci-mem.c b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-mem.c
> index d2900197a49e..e8406db78782 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/host/xhci-mem.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-mem.c
> @@ -2160,6 +2160,11 @@ static int xhci_setup_port_arrays(struct xhci_hcd *xhci, gfp_t flags)
> struct device *dev = xhci_to_hcd(xhci)->self.sysdev;
>
> num_ports = HCS_MAX_PORTS(xhci->hcs_params1);
> + if (num_ports == 0) {
> + xhci_warn(xhci, "Host controller has no port enabled\n");
> + return -ENODEV;
> + }
Should this be backported to older kernels, if so, how far back if this
is common hardware?
thanks,
greg k-h
