Re: [PATCH] bus: mhi: core: Use current ee in intvec handler for syserr

[Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@codeaurora.org>]

On 2/16/2021 10:36 AM, Bhaumik Bhatt wrote:
> On 2021-02-15 11:32 PM, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 05:40:14PM -0700, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
>>> The intvec handler stores the caches ee in a local variable for use in
>>> processing the intvec.  When determining if a syserr is a fatal error or
>>> not, the intvec handler is using the cached version, when it should be
>>> using the current ee read from the device.  Currently, the device could
>>> be in the PBL ee as the result of a fatal error, but the cached ee might
>>> be AMSS, which would cause the intvec handler to incorrectly signal a
>>> non-fatal syserr.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 3000f85b8f47 ("bus: mhi: core: Add support for basic PM 
>>> operations")
>>> Signed-off-by: Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@codeaurora.org>
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mani
>>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/bus/mhi/core/main.c | 2 +-
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/bus/mhi/core/main.c b/drivers/bus/mhi/core/main.c
>>> index 4e0131b..f182736 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/bus/mhi/core/main.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/bus/mhi/core/main.c
>>> @@ -448,7 +448,7 @@ irqreturn_t mhi_intvec_threaded_handler(int 
>>> irq_number, void *priv)
>>>          wake_up_all(&mhi_cntrl->state_event);
>>>
>>>          /* For fatal errors, we let controller decide next step */
>>> -        if (MHI_IN_PBL(ee))
>>> +        if (MHI_IN_PBL(mhi_cntrl->ee))
>>>              mhi_cntrl->status_cb(mhi_cntrl, MHI_CB_FATAL_ERROR);
>>>          else
>>>              mhi_pm_sys_err_handler(mhi_cntrl);
>>> -- 
>>> Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the
>>> Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
>>>
> 
> This was being fixed by my patch series for execution environment.
> 
> I should just send the most important of my patches as one line fixers 
> from now on.

Its been an issue for some 9 months now.  I really don't care how it 
gets fixed, but it seems to be past time for it to be fixed.

Sending simple little fixes on their own seems to accelerate the review 
process of those fixes, and doesn't hold them back if some "dependency" 
in a series has comments which need to be fixed.  It is a judgement call 
to determine if a set of fixes should be sent together or not, but I 
personally try to send individual patches when I can.

-- 
Jeffrey Hugo
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the
Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.