* [PATCH] ide: ide_port_wait_ready() fix
@ 2011-10-11 17:13 Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2011-10-11 19:17 ` David Miller
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz @ 2011-10-11 17:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Miller; +Cc: linux-ide, linux-kernel
From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH] ide: ide_port_wait_ready() fix
Fix for commit a20b2a4 ("ide: skip probe if there are no devices on
the port (v2)"). We must check for slave device before failing.
Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
---
drivers/ide/ide-probe.c | 6 ++++--
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Index: b/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c
===================================================================
--- a/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c
+++ b/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c
@@ -598,7 +598,7 @@ static int ide_port_wait_ready(ide_hwif_
{
const struct ide_tp_ops *tp_ops = hwif->tp_ops;
ide_drive_t *drive;
- int i, rc;
+ int i, rc, prev_rc = 0;
printk(KERN_DEBUG "Probing IDE interface %s...\n", hwif->name);
@@ -623,8 +623,10 @@ static int ide_port_wait_ready(ide_hwif_
tp_ops->write_devctl(hwif, ATA_DEVCTL_OBS);
mdelay(2);
rc = ide_wait_not_busy(hwif, 35000);
- if (rc)
+ if (prev_rc && rc)
goto out;
+ prev_rc = rc;
+ rc = 0;
} else
printk(KERN_DEBUG "%s: ide_wait_not_busy() skipped\n",
drive->name);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] ide: ide_port_wait_ready() fix
2011-10-11 17:13 [PATCH] ide: ide_port_wait_ready() fix Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
@ 2011-10-11 19:17 ` David Miller
2011-10-12 14:59 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: David Miller @ 2011-10-11 19:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bzolnier; +Cc: linux-ide, linux-kernel
From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:13:18 +0200
> From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
> Subject: [PATCH] ide: ide_port_wait_ready() fix
>
> Fix for commit a20b2a4 ("ide: skip probe if there are no devices on
> the port (v2)"). We must check for slave device before failing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
This will mishandle the case where there is no slave in the device
list.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] ide: ide_port_wait_ready() fix
2011-10-11 19:17 ` David Miller
@ 2011-10-12 14:59 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2011-10-12 19:03 ` David Miller
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz @ 2011-10-12 14:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Miller; +Cc: linux-ide, linux-kernel
David Miller wrote:
> From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:13:18 +0200
>
> > From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
> > Subject: [PATCH] ide: ide_port_wait_ready() fix
> >
> > Fix for commit a20b2a4 ("ide: skip probe if there are no devices on
> > the port (v2)"). We must check for slave device before failing.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
>
> This will mishandle the case where there is no slave in the device
> list.
I don't see it:
@ -598,7 +598,7 @@ static int ide_port_wait_ready(ide_hwif_
{
const struct ide_tp_ops *tp_ops = hwif->tp_ops;
ide_drive_t *drive;
- int i, rc;
+ int i, rc, prev_rc = 0;
printk(KERN_DEBUG "Probing IDE interface %s...\n", hwif->name);
@@ -623,8 +623,10 @@ static int ide_port_wait_ready(ide_hwif_
tp_ops->write_devctl(hwif, ATA_DEVCTL_OBS);
mdelay(2);
rc = ide_wait_not_busy(hwif, 35000);
- if (rc)
+ if (prev_rc && rc)
goto out;
+ prev_rc = rc;
+ rc = 0;
} else
printk(KERN_DEBUG "%s: ide_wait_not_busy() skipped\n",
drive->name);
If there is no slave device but there is a master device the code falls-through
and returns a success.
The patch fixes regression introduced in commit a20b2a4 as some esoteric
setups return ide_wait_not_busy() -ENODEV error on master device while there
is slave device present in the system.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] ide: ide_port_wait_ready() fix
2011-10-12 14:59 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
@ 2011-10-12 19:03 ` David Miller
2011-10-13 10:41 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: David Miller @ 2011-10-12 19:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bzolnier; +Cc: linux-ide, linux-kernel
From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:59:55 +0200
> David Miller wrote:
>
>> From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
>> Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:13:18 +0200
>>
>> > From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
>> > Subject: [PATCH] ide: ide_port_wait_ready() fix
>> >
>> > Fix for commit a20b2a4 ("ide: skip probe if there are no devices on
>> > the port (v2)"). We must check for slave device before failing.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
>>
>> This will mishandle the case where there is no slave in the device
>> list.
>
> I don't see it:
>
> @ -598,7 +598,7 @@ static int ide_port_wait_ready(ide_hwif_
> {
> const struct ide_tp_ops *tp_ops = hwif->tp_ops;
> ide_drive_t *drive;
> - int i, rc;
> + int i, rc, prev_rc = 0;
>
> printk(KERN_DEBUG "Probing IDE interface %s...\n", hwif->name);
>
> @@ -623,8 +623,10 @@ static int ide_port_wait_ready(ide_hwif_
> tp_ops->write_devctl(hwif, ATA_DEVCTL_OBS);
> mdelay(2);
> rc = ide_wait_not_busy(hwif, 35000);
> - if (rc)
> + if (prev_rc && rc)
> goto out;
> + prev_rc = rc;
> + rc = 0;
> } else
> printk(KERN_DEBUG "%s: ide_wait_not_busy() skipped\n",
> drive->name);
>
> If there is no slave device but there is a master device the code falls-through
> and returns a success.
That's not what we want, if there is only a master device and no slave device
in the list this loop is iterating over we want to return the error code
in "rc", not zero.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] ide: ide_port_wait_ready() fix
2011-10-12 19:03 ` David Miller
@ 2011-10-13 10:41 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2011-10-13 17:25 ` David Miller
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz @ 2011-10-13 10:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Miller; +Cc: linux-ide, linux-kernel
David Miller wrote:
> From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:59:55 +0200
>
> > David Miller wrote:
> >
> >> From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
> >> Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:13:18 +0200
> >>
> >> > From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
> >> > Subject: [PATCH] ide: ide_port_wait_ready() fix
> >> >
> >> > Fix for commit a20b2a4 ("ide: skip probe if there are no devices on
> >> > the port (v2)"). We must check for slave device before failing.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
> >>
> >> This will mishandle the case where there is no slave in the device
> >> list.
> >
> > I don't see it:
> >
> > @ -598,7 +598,7 @@ static int ide_port_wait_ready(ide_hwif_
> > {
> > const struct ide_tp_ops *tp_ops = hwif->tp_ops;
> > ide_drive_t *drive;
> > - int i, rc;
> > + int i, rc, prev_rc = 0;
> >
> > printk(KERN_DEBUG "Probing IDE interface %s...\n", hwif->name);
> >
> > @@ -623,8 +623,10 @@ static int ide_port_wait_ready(ide_hwif_
> > tp_ops->write_devctl(hwif, ATA_DEVCTL_OBS);
> > mdelay(2);
> > rc = ide_wait_not_busy(hwif, 35000);
> > - if (rc)
> > + if (prev_rc && rc)
> > goto out;
> > + prev_rc = rc;
> > + rc = 0;
> > } else
> > printk(KERN_DEBUG "%s: ide_wait_not_busy() skipped\n",
> > drive->name);
> >
> > If there is no slave device but there is a master device the code falls-through
> > and returns a success.
>
> That's not what we want, if there is only a master device and no slave device
> in the list this loop is iterating over we want to return the error code
> in "rc", not zero.
No, we want to return zero (success) since at least once device was found
(otherwise we fail probe on some esoteric setups returning -ENODEV from
ide_wait_not_busy() for master device).
This is how this function worked before commit a20b2a4 if you want something
else okay but it needs to work with aforementioned setups.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] ide: ide_port_wait_ready() fix
2011-10-13 10:41 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
@ 2011-10-13 17:25 ` David Miller
2011-10-13 17:44 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: David Miller @ 2011-10-13 17:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bzolnier; +Cc: linux-ide, linux-kernel
From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:41:04 +0200
> David Miller wrote:
>
>> From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
>> Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:59:55 +0200
>>
>> > David Miller wrote:
>> >
>> >> From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
>> >> Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:13:18 +0200
>> >>
>> >> > From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
>> >> > Subject: [PATCH] ide: ide_port_wait_ready() fix
>> >> >
>> >> > Fix for commit a20b2a4 ("ide: skip probe if there are no devices on
>> >> > the port (v2)"). We must check for slave device before failing.
>> >> >
>> >> > Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
>> >>
>> >> This will mishandle the case where there is no slave in the device
>> >> list.
>> >
>> > I don't see it:
>> >
>> > @ -598,7 +598,7 @@ static int ide_port_wait_ready(ide_hwif_
>> > {
>> > const struct ide_tp_ops *tp_ops = hwif->tp_ops;
>> > ide_drive_t *drive;
>> > - int i, rc;
>> > + int i, rc, prev_rc = 0;
>> >
>> > printk(KERN_DEBUG "Probing IDE interface %s...\n", hwif->name);
>> >
>> > @@ -623,8 +623,10 @@ static int ide_port_wait_ready(ide_hwif_
>> > tp_ops->write_devctl(hwif, ATA_DEVCTL_OBS);
>> > mdelay(2);
>> > rc = ide_wait_not_busy(hwif, 35000);
>> > - if (rc)
>> > + if (prev_rc && rc)
>> > goto out;
>> > + prev_rc = rc;
>> > + rc = 0;
>> > } else
>> > printk(KERN_DEBUG "%s: ide_wait_not_busy() skipped\n",
>> > drive->name);
>> >
>> > If there is no slave device but there is a master device the code falls-through
>> > and returns a success.
>>
>> That's not what we want, if there is only a master device and no slave device
>> in the list this loop is iterating over we want to return the error code
>> in "rc", not zero.
>
> No, we want to return zero (success) since at least once device was found
> (otherwise we fail probe on some esoteric setups returning -ENODEV from
> ide_wait_not_busy() for master device).
>
> This is how this function worked before commit a20b2a4 if you want something
> else okay but it needs to work with aforementioned setups.
You unconditionally assign "prev_rc = rc" and set "rc = 0" so if we only run
the loop once, we return zero.
And we do this even if that one device gave a non-zero return value.
That's not what we want.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] ide: ide_port_wait_ready() fix
2011-10-13 17:25 ` David Miller
@ 2011-10-13 17:44 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz @ 2011-10-13 17:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Miller; +Cc: linux-ide, linux-kernel
David Miller wrote:
> From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
> Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:41:04 +0200
>
> > David Miller wrote:
> >
> >> From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
> >> Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:59:55 +0200
> >>
> >> > David Miller wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
> >> >> Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:13:18 +0200
> >> >>
> >> >> > From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
> >> >> > Subject: [PATCH] ide: ide_port_wait_ready() fix
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Fix for commit a20b2a4 ("ide: skip probe if there are no devices on
> >> >> > the port (v2)"). We must check for slave device before failing.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
> >> >>
> >> >> This will mishandle the case where there is no slave in the device
> >> >> list.
> >> >
> >> > I don't see it:
> >> >
> >> > @ -598,7 +598,7 @@ static int ide_port_wait_ready(ide_hwif_
> >> > {
> >> > const struct ide_tp_ops *tp_ops = hwif->tp_ops;
> >> > ide_drive_t *drive;
> >> > - int i, rc;
> >> > + int i, rc, prev_rc = 0;
> >> >
> >> > printk(KERN_DEBUG "Probing IDE interface %s...\n", hwif->name);
> >> >
> >> > @@ -623,8 +623,10 @@ static int ide_port_wait_ready(ide_hwif_
> >> > tp_ops->write_devctl(hwif, ATA_DEVCTL_OBS);
> >> > mdelay(2);
> >> > rc = ide_wait_not_busy(hwif, 35000);
> >> > - if (rc)
> >> > + if (prev_rc && rc)
> >> > goto out;
> >> > + prev_rc = rc;
> >> > + rc = 0;
> >> > } else
> >> > printk(KERN_DEBUG "%s: ide_wait_not_busy() skipped\n",
> >> > drive->name);
> >> >
> >> > If there is no slave device but there is a master device the code falls-through
> >> > and returns a success.
> >>
> >> That's not what we want, if there is only a master device and no slave device
> >> in the list this loop is iterating over we want to return the error code
> >> in "rc", not zero.
> >
> > No, we want to return zero (success) since at least once device was found
> > (otherwise we fail probe on some esoteric setups returning -ENODEV from
> > ide_wait_not_busy() for master device).
> >
> > This is how this function worked before commit a20b2a4 if you want something
> > else okay but it needs to work with aforementioned setups.
>
> You unconditionally assign "prev_rc = rc" and set "rc = 0" so if we only run
> the loop once, we return zero.
>
> And we do this even if that one device gave a non-zero return value.
>
> That's not what we want.
Here is revised patch:
From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2] ide: ide_port_wait_ready() fix
Fix for commit a20b2a4 ("ide: skip probe if there are no devices on
the port (v2)"). We must check for slave device before failing.
Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
---
drivers/ide/ide-probe.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Index: b/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c
===================================================================
--- a/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c
+++ b/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c
@@ -598,7 +598,7 @@ static int ide_port_wait_ready(ide_hwif_
{
const struct ide_tp_ops *tp_ops = hwif->tp_ops;
ide_drive_t *drive;
- int i, rc;
+ int i, rc, prev_rc = 0;
printk(KERN_DEBUG "Probing IDE interface %s...\n", hwif->name);
@@ -623,8 +623,9 @@ static int ide_port_wait_ready(ide_hwif_
tp_ops->write_devctl(hwif, ATA_DEVCTL_OBS);
mdelay(2);
rc = ide_wait_not_busy(hwif, 35000);
- if (rc)
+ if (prev_rc && rc)
goto out;
+ prev_rc = rc;
} else
printk(KERN_DEBUG "%s: ide_wait_not_busy() skipped\n",
drive->name);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-10-13 17:44 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-10-11 17:13 [PATCH] ide: ide_port_wait_ready() fix Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2011-10-11 19:17 ` David Miller
2011-10-12 14:59 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2011-10-12 19:03 ` David Miller
2011-10-13 10:41 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2011-10-13 17:25 ` David Miller
2011-10-13 17:44 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).