From: Liwei Song <liwei.song@windriver.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
linux-acpi <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI, APEI: Fixup incorrect 16-bit access width firmware bug
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 14:16:02 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <597833A2.8090709@windriver.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHp75Vf5wpM4BW3umG5c1gHgmBEgD_+paYyvo6NTLGeEr9JB_g@mail.gmail.com>
On 07/21/2017 05:56 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Song liwei <liwei.song@windriver.com> wrote:
>
>> [Firmware Bug]: APEI: Invalid bit width + offset in GAR [0xb2/16/0/1/1]
>>
>> This is due to an 8-bit access width is specified for a 16-bit register,
>> Do bit_width check just like what the original commit have done.
>
>> else if (bit_width == 64 && bit_offset == 0 && (*paddr & 0x07) == 0 &&
>> *access_bit_width < 64)
>> *access_bit_width = 64;
>> + else if (bit_width == 16 && bit_offset == 0 && (*paddr & 0x01) == 0 &&
>> + *access_bit_width < 16)
>> + *access_bit_width = 16;
>
> Wouldn't be better to rearrange that it will go in a sequence
> (16,32,64 or 64,32,16) ?
>
> or move bit_offset == 0 into external condion
>
> /* Fixup common BIOS bug */
> if (bit_offset == 0) {
> if (bit_width == 16 && (*paddr & 0x01) == 0 && *access_bit_width < 16)
> *access_bit_width = 16;
> else if (bit_width == 32 && (*paddr & 0x03) == 0 &&
> *access_bit_width < 32)
> *access_bit_width = 32;
> else if (bit_width == 64 && (*paddr & 0x07) == 0 &&
> *access_bit_width < 64)
> *access_bit_width = 64;
> }
>
>
> It might be (I'm not sure it will make it better, just a side note)
> considered to convert each internal conditional to
>
> ...if (bit_width == XX && (*paddr & YY) == 0)
> *access_bit_width = max(*access_bit_width, bit_width);
Hi Andy,
Thanks for your suggestion, what about the condition like the following?
The main bug in bios is bit_width is not comfortable with access_bit_width
So check it first.
if (*access_bit_width < bit_width && bit_offset == 0) {
if ((bit_width == 16 && (*paddr & 0x01) == 0) ||
(bit_width == 32 && (*paddr & 0x03) == 0) ||
(bit_width == 64 && (*paddr & 0x07) == 0))
*access_bit_width = bit_width;
}
Thanks,
Liwei.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-26 6:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-21 9:41 [PATCH] ACPI, APEI: Fixup incorrect 16-bit access width firmware bug Song liwei
2017-07-21 9:56 ` Andy Shevchenko
2017-07-26 6:16 ` Liwei Song [this message]
2017-07-26 10:44 ` Andy Shevchenko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=597833A2.8090709@windriver.com \
--to=liwei.song@windriver.com \
--cc=andy.shevchenko@gmail.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).