From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dan Carpenter Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] scsi: arcmsr: Fix suspend/resume of ACB_ADAPTER_TYPE_B part 2 Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 10:59:59 +0300 Message-ID: <20190117070227.GM4504@kadam> References: <1547696703.4339.21.camel@Centos6.3-64> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1547696703.4339.21.camel@Centos6.3-64> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Ching Huang Cc: martin.petersen@oracle.com, James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hch@infradead.org, colin.king@canonical.com List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 11:45:03AM +0800, Ching Huang wrote: > >From Ching Huang > > Fix suspend/resume of ACB_ADAPTER_TYPE_B part 2. > What does this look like from a user perspective? Does it fail every time or does it only fail sometimes? What's the bug exactly? There is no Fixes tag... > Signed-off-by: Ching Huang > --- > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/arcmsr/arcmsr.h b/drivers/scsi/arcmsr/arcmsr.h > index a94c513..b98c632 100755 > --- a/drivers/scsi/arcmsr/arcmsr.h > +++ b/drivers/scsi/arcmsr/arcmsr.h > @@ -508,9 +508,9 @@ struct MessageUnit_A > struct MessageUnit_B > { > uint32_t post_qbuffer[ARCMSR_MAX_HBB_POSTQUEUE]; > - uint32_t done_qbuffer[ARCMSR_MAX_HBB_POSTQUEUE]; > + volatile uint32_t done_qbuffer[ARCMSR_MAX_HBB_POSTQUEUE]; There is a well known rule of thumb that when someone uses "volatile" in the kernel it means there is a locking problem... Is this __iomem or something? > uint32_t postq_index; > - uint32_t doneq_index; > + volatile uint32_t doneq_index; > uint32_t __iomem *drv2iop_doorbell; > uint32_t __iomem *drv2iop_doorbell_mask; > uint32_t __iomem *iop2drv_doorbell; > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/arcmsr/arcmsr_hba.c b/drivers/scsi/arcmsr/arcmsr_hba.c > index 5736434..88053b1 100755 > --- a/drivers/scsi/arcmsr/arcmsr_hba.c > +++ b/drivers/scsi/arcmsr/arcmsr_hba.c > @@ -1113,7 +1113,11 @@ static int arcmsr_resume(struct pci_dev *pdev) > switch (acb->adapter_type) { > case ACB_ADAPTER_TYPE_B: { > struct MessageUnit_B *reg = acb->pmuB; > - reg->post_qbuffer[0] = 0; > + uint32_t i; > + for (i = 0; i < ARCMSR_MAX_HBB_POSTQUEUE; i++) { > + reg->post_qbuffer[i] = 0; > + reg->done_qbuffer[i] = 0; > + } Is this cause by patch 1 changing the zalloc to regular alloc?? If so then it should be folded into that patch instead of sent separately. regards, dan carpenter