Peter Seiderer <ps.report@xxxxxxx> writes:
> On Sat, 22 Apr 2023 12:18:03 +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Simon Horman <simon.horman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> > On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 10:43:16PM +0200, Peter Seiderer wrote:
>> >> Fix ath9k_hw_verify_hang()/ar9003_hw_detect_mac_hang() register offset
>> >> calculation (do not overflow the shift for the second register/queues
>> >> above five, use the register layout described in the comments above
>> >> ath9k_hw_verify_hang() instead).
>> >>
>> >> Fixes: 222e04830ff0 ("ath9k: Fix MAC HW hang check for AR9003")
>> >>
>> >> Reported-by: Gregg Wonderly <greggwonderly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-wireless/E3A9C354-0CB7-420C-ADEF-F0177FB722F4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
>> >> Signed-off-by: Peter Seiderer <ps.report@xxxxxxx>
>> >> ---
>> >> Notes:
>> >> - tested with MikroTik R11e-5HnD/Atheros AR9300 Rev:4 (lspci: 168c:0033
>> >> Qualcomm Atheros AR958x 802.11abgn Wireless Network Adapter (rev 01))
>> >> card
>> >> ---
>> >> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/ar9003_hw.c | 27 ++++++++++++++--------
>> >> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>> >>
>> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/ar9003_hw.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/ar9003_hw.c
>> >> index 4f27a9fb1482..0ccf13a35fb4 100644
>> >> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/ar9003_hw.c
>> >> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/ar9003_hw.c
>> >> @@ -1099,17 +1099,22 @@ static bool ath9k_hw_verify_hang(struct ath_hw *ah, unsigned int queue)
>> >> {
>> >> u32 dma_dbg_chain, dma_dbg_complete;
>> >> u8 dcu_chain_state, dcu_complete_state;
>> >> + unsigned int dbg_reg, reg_offset;
>> >> int i;
>> >>
>> >> - for (i = 0; i < NUM_STATUS_READS; i++) {
>> >> - if (queue < 6)
>> >> - dma_dbg_chain = REG_READ(ah, AR_DMADBG_4);
>> >> - else
>> >> - dma_dbg_chain = REG_READ(ah, AR_DMADBG_5);
>> >> + if (queue < 6) {
>> >> + dbg_reg = AR_DMADBG_4;
>> >> + reg_offset = i * 5;
>> >
>> > Hi Peter,
>> >
>> > unless my eyes are deceiving me, i is not initialised here.
>>
>> Nice catch! Hmm, I wonder why my test compile didn't complain about
>> that? Or maybe it did and I overlooked it? Anyway, Kalle, I already
>> delegated this patch to you in patchwork, so please drop it and I'll try
>> to do better on reviewing the next one :)
>
> No warning reported because of Makefile:
>
> 1038 # Enabled with W=2, disabled by default as noisy
> 1039 ifdef CONFIG_CC_IS_GCC
> 1040 KBUILD_CFLAGS += -Wno-maybe-uninitialized
> 1041 endif
Ah, I see! Right then, that explains it :)
-Toke
