Søren Schmidt wrote: > Nate Lawson wrote: > >> I took a quick look at this ATA panic. The exact same one occurs for >> Ceri. A quick dissassemble shows that the testb is the check for the >> DMA flag at the very end of ata_generic_transaction(). The bug >> appears to be that this may be a PIO request (since the DMA check is >> outside the switch() statement). The fix is to make sure it's a DMA >> request before dereferencing an element of the DMA struct. Try the >> attached patch. > > No, the fix is to make sure there is a valid ch->dma pointer, the below > is the correct fix. > > --- ata-lowlevel.c 5 Aug 2004 21:13:41 -0000 1.41 > +++ ata-lowlevel.c 6 Aug 2004 22:31:16 -0000 > _at__at_ -295,7 +295,7 _at__at_ > } > > /* request finish here */ > - if (ch->dma->flags & ATA_DMA_LOADED) > + if (ch->dma && ch->dma->flags & ATA_DMA_LOADED) > ch->dma->unload(ch); > return ATA_OP_FINISHED; > } Thanks. Under what circumstances is a request generated with ATA_R_DMA set in the flags but where the channel's dma struct has not been allocated? -NateReceived on Fri Aug 06 2004 - 21:35:45 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:05 UTC