[patch] x86, efi: precedence error in setup_efi_pci()

[patch] x86, efi: precedence error in setup_efi_pci()

[Dan Carpenter]

Negate has higher precedence than bitwise AND so the condition is always
false.

Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>

diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c
index b1942e2..18e329c 100644
--- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c
@@ -302,7 +302,7 @@ static efi_status_t setup_efi_pci(struct boot_params *params)
 		if (status != EFI_SUCCESS)
 			continue;
 
-		if (!attributes & EFI_PCI_IO_ATTRIBUTE_EMBEDDED_ROM)
+		if (!(attributes & EFI_PCI_IO_ATTRIBUTE_EMBEDDED_ROM))
 			continue;
 
 		if (!pci->romimage || !pci->romsize)

Re: [patch] x86, efi: precedence error in setup_efi_pci()

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 12/06/2012 10:16 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> Negate has higher precedence than bitwise AND so the condition is always
> false.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c
> index b1942e2..18e329c 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c
> @@ -302,7 +302,7 @@ static efi_status_t setup_efi_pci(struct boot_params *params)
>   		if (status != EFI_SUCCESS)
>   			continue;
>
> -		if (!attributes & EFI_PCI_IO_ATTRIBUTE_EMBEDDED_ROM)
> +		if (!(attributes & EFI_PCI_IO_ATTRIBUTE_EMBEDDED_ROM))
>   			continue;
>
>   		if (!pci->romimage || !pci->romsize)
>

What is the baseline for this patch?

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

Re: [patch] x86, efi: precedence error in setup_efi_pci()

[Dan Carpenter]

On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 07:05:53PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 12/06/2012 10:16 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> >Negate has higher precedence than bitwise AND so the condition is always
> >false.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> >
> >diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c
> >index b1942e2..18e329c 100644
> >--- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c
> >+++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c
> >@@ -302,7 +302,7 @@ static efi_status_t setup_efi_pci(struct boot_params *params)
> >  		if (status != EFI_SUCCESS)
> >  			continue;
> >
> >-		if (!attributes & EFI_PCI_IO_ATTRIBUTE_EMBEDDED_ROM)
> >+		if (!(attributes & EFI_PCI_IO_ATTRIBUTE_EMBEDDED_ROM))
> >  			continue;
> >
> >  		if (!pci->romimage || !pci->romsize)
> >
> 
> What is the baseline for this patch?
> 

Sorry, this is a linux-next bug.  Introduced in:

commit dd5fc854de5fd37adfcef8a366cd21a55aa01d3d
Author: Matthew Garrett <mjg-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Date:   Wed Dec 5 14:33:26 2012 -0700

    EFI: Stash ROMs if they're not in the PCI BAR

regards,
dan carpenter

Re: [patch] x86, efi: precedence error in setup_efi_pci()

[Matt Fleming]

On Mon, 2012-12-10 at 11:44 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 07:05:53PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > On 12/06/2012 10:16 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > >Negate has higher precedence than bitwise AND so the condition is always
> > >false.
> > >
> > >Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter-QHcLZuEGTsvQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> > >
> > >diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c
> > >index b1942e2..18e329c 100644
> > >--- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c
> > >+++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/eboot.c
> > >@@ -302,7 +302,7 @@ static efi_status_t setup_efi_pci(struct boot_params *params)
> > >  		if (status != EFI_SUCCESS)
> > >  			continue;
> > >
> > >-		if (!attributes & EFI_PCI_IO_ATTRIBUTE_EMBEDDED_ROM)
> > >+		if (!(attributes & EFI_PCI_IO_ATTRIBUTE_EMBEDDED_ROM))
> > >  			continue;
> > >
> > >  		if (!pci->romimage || !pci->romsize)
> > >
> > 
> > What is the baseline for this patch?
> > 
> 
> Sorry, this is a linux-next bug.  Introduced in:
> 
> commit dd5fc854de5fd37adfcef8a366cd21a55aa01d3d
> Author: Matthew Garrett <mjg-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> Date:   Wed Dec 5 14:33:26 2012 -0700
> 
>     EFI: Stash ROMs if they're not in the PCI BAR

Thanks Dan, I've picked this up.

Re: [patch] x86, efi: precedence error in setup_efi_pci()

[Vitaly Budovski]

Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...> writes:

> 
> Negate has higher precedence than bitwise AND so the condition is always
> false.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...>
> index b1942e2..18e329c 100644
> -		if (!attributes & EFI_PCI_IO_ATTRIBUTE_EMBEDDED_ROM)
> +		if (!(attributes & EFI_PCI_IO_ATTRIBUTE_EMBEDDED_ROM))
 

Hi,

This patch breaks the detection of ATI VBIOS for me on a MacBook Pro 8,2.


Regards,

Vitaly

Re: [patch] x86, efi: precedence error in setup_efi_pci()

[Matt Fleming]

(Cc'ing some folks so this doesn't get lost completely)

On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 10:20 +0000, Vitaly Budovski wrote:
> Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...> writes:
> 
> > 
> > Negate has higher precedence than bitwise AND so the condition is always
> > false.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...>
> > index b1942e2..18e329c 100644
> > -		if (!attributes & EFI_PCI_IO_ATTRIBUTE_EMBEDDED_ROM)
> > +		if (!(attributes & EFI_PCI_IO_ATTRIBUTE_EMBEDDED_ROM))
>  
> 
> Hi,
> 
> This patch breaks the detection of ATI VBIOS for me on a MacBook Pro 8,2.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Vitaly

-- 
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center

Re: [patch] x86, efi: precedence error in setup_efi_pci()

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 01/29/2013 03:04 AM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> (Cc'ing some folks so this doesn't get lost completely)
>

I thought this got pushed to Linus already?  Did I get confused and 
forget or something?

	-hpa


-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

Re: [patch] x86, efi: precedence error in setup_efi_pci()

[Matt Fleming]

On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 03:16 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 01/29/2013 03:04 AM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> > (Cc'ing some folks so this doesn't get lost completely)
> >
> 
> I thought this got pushed to Linus already?  Did I get confused and 
> forget or something?

You didn't forget anything - it was pushed to Linus. I was quoting
Vitaly's bug report because there were no Cc's on his email,

> Hi,
> 
> This patch breaks the detection of ATI VBIOS for me on a MacBook Pro 8,2.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Vitaly

-- 
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center