Re: [Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH 1/14 v3] IB/hfi1: Check the return value of pcie_capability_read_*()
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
Date: 2020-07-13 17:09:45
Also in:
linux-rdma, lkml
On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 07:55:25PM +0200, Saheed O. Bolarinwa wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Bolarinwa Olayemi Saheed <redacted> On failure pcie_capability_read_dword() sets it's last parameter, val to 0. In this case dn and up will be 0, so aspm_hw_l1_supported() will return false. However, with Patch 14/14, it is possible that val is set to ~0 on failure. This would introduce a bug because (x & x) == (~0 & x). So with dn and up being 0x02, a true value is return when the read has actually failed. This bug can be avoided if the return value of pcie_capability_read_dword is checked to confirm success. The behaviour of the function remains intact. Check the return value of pcie_capability_read_dword() to ensure success. Suggested-by: Bjorn Helgaas <redacted> Signed-off-by: Bolarinwa Olayemi Saheed <redacted> drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/aspm.c | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/aspm.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/aspm.c index a3c53be4072c..80d0b3edd983 100644 +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hfi1/aspm.c@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ static bool aspm_hw_l1_supported(struct hfi1_devdata *dd) { struct pci_dev *parent = dd->pcidev->bus->self; u32 up, dn; + int ret_up, ret_dn; /* * If the driver does not have access to the upstream component,@@ -32,14 +33,14 @@ static bool aspm_hw_l1_supported(struct hfi1_devdata *dd) if (!parent) return false; - pcie_capability_read_dword(dd->pcidev, PCI_EXP_LNKCAP, &dn); + ret_dn = pcie_capability_read_dword(dd->pcidev, PCI_EXP_LNKCAP, &dn); dn = ASPM_L1_SUPPORTED(dn); - pcie_capability_read_dword(parent, PCI_EXP_LNKCAP, &up); + ret_up = pcie_capability_read_dword(parent, PCI_EXP_LNKCAP, &up); up = ASPM_L1_SUPPORTED(up); /* ASPM works on A-step but is reported as not supported */ - return (!!dn || is_ax(dd)) && !!up; + return !!ret_dn && !!ret_up && (!!dn || is_ax(dd)) && !!up; }
what is all the !! for? boolean contexts already coerce to boolean Jason _______________________________________________ Linux-kernel-mentees mailing list Linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-kernel-mentees