linux/drivers/ata, branch v6.14

Merge tag 'ata-6.14-final' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/libata/linux

2025-03-19T14:31:43Z

Pull ata fix from Niklas Cassel: - Fix a regression on ATI AHCI controllers, where certain Samsung drives fails to be detected on a warm boot when LPM is enabled. LPM on ATI AHCI works fine with other drives. Likewise, the Samsung drives works fine with LPM with other AHI controllers. Thus, just like the weirdo ATA_QUIRK_NO_NCQ_ON_ATI quirk, add a new ATA_QUIRK_NO_LPM_ON_ATI quirk to disable LPM only on ATI AHCI controllers. * tag 'ata-6.14-final' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/libata/linux: ata: libata-core: Add ATA_QUIRK_NO_LPM_ON_ATI for certain Samsung SSDs

ata: libata-core: Add ATA_QUIRK_NO_LPM_ON_ATI for certain Samsung SSDs

2025-03-18T09:11:28Z

Before commit 7627a0edef54 ("ata: ahci: Drop low power policy board type") the ATI AHCI controllers specified board type 'board_ahci' rather than board type 'board_ahci'. This means that LPM was historically not enabled for the ATI AHCI controllers. By looking at commit 7a8526a5cd51 ("libata: Add ATA_HORKAGE_NO_NCQ_ON_ATI for Samsung 860 and 870 SSD."), it is clear that, for some unknown reason, that Samsung SSDs do not play nice with ATI AHCI controllers. (When using other AHCI controllers, NCQ can be enabled on these Samsung SSDs without issues.) In a similar way, from user reports, it is clear the ATI AHCI controllers can enable LPM on e.g. Maxtor HDDs perfectly fine, but when enabling LPM on certain Samsung SSDs, things break. (E.g. the SSDs will not get detected by the ATI AHCI controller even after a COMRESET.) Yet, when using LPM on these Samsung SSDs with other AHCI controllers, e.g. Intel AHCI controllers, these Samsung drives appear to work perfectly fine. Considering that the combination of ATI + Samsung, for some unknown reason, does not seem to work well, disable LPM when detecting an ATI AHCI controller with a problematic Samsung SSD. Apply this new ATA_QUIRK_NO_LPM_ON_ATI quirk for all Samsung SSDs that have already been reported to not play nice with ATI (ATA_QUIRK_NO_NCQ_ON_ATI). Fixes: 7627a0edef54 ("ata: ahci: Drop low power policy board type") Suggested-by: Hans de Goede Reported-by: Eric Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ide/Z8SBZMBjvVXA7OAK@eldamar.lan/ Tested-by: Eric Reviewed-by: Damien Le Moal Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250317170348.1748671-2-cassel@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel

Merge tag 'ata-6.14-rc5' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/libata/linux

2025-03-01T16:59:29Z

Pull ata fixes from Niklas Cassel: - Fix a regression where the enablement of the PHYs would be skipped for device trees without any port child nodes (me) - Revert ATA_QUIRK_NOLPM for Samsung SSD 870 QVO drives, as it stops systems from entering lower package states. LPM works on newer firmware versions. We will need a more refined quirk that only targets the older firmware versions (me) * tag 'ata-6.14-rc5' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/libata/linux: Revert "ata: libata-core: Add ATA_QUIRK_NOLPM for Samsung SSD 870 QVO drives" ata: ahci: Make ahci_ignore_port() handle empty mask_port_map

Revert "ata: libata-core: Add ATA_QUIRK_NOLPM for Samsung SSD 870 QVO drives"

2025-03-01T09:18:25Z

This reverts commit cc77e2ce187d26cc66af3577bf896d7410eb25ab. It was reported that adding ATA_QUIRK_NOLPM for Samsung SSD 870 QVO drives breaks entering lower package states for certain systems. It turns out that Samsung SSD 870 QVO actually has working LPM when using a recent SSD firmware version. The author of commit cc77e2ce187d ("ata: libata-core: Add ATA_QUIRK_NOLPM for Samsung SSD 870 QVO drives") reported himself that only older SSD firmware versions have broken LPM: https://lore.kernel.org/stable/93c10d38-718c-459d-84a5-4d87680b4da7@debian.org/ Unfortunately, he did not specify which older firmware version he was using which had broken LPM. Let's revert this quirk, which has FW version field specified as NULL (which means that it applies for all Samsung SSD 870 QVO firmware versions) for now. Once the author reports which older firmware version(s) that are broken, we can create a more fine grained quirk, which populates the FW version field accordingly. Fixes: cc77e2ce187d ("ata: libata-core: Add ATA_QUIRK_NOLPM for Samsung SSD 870 QVO drives") Reported-by: Dieter Mummenschanz Closes: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=219747 Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250228122603.91814-2-cassel@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel

ata: ahci: Make ahci_ignore_port() handle empty mask_port_map

2025-02-26T10:24:30Z

Commit 8c87215dd3a2 ("ata: libahci_platform: support non-consecutive port numbers") added a skip to ahci_platform_enable_phys() for ports that are not in mask_port_map. The code in ahci_platform_get_resources(), will currently set mask_port_map for each child "port" node it finds in the device tree. However, device trees that do not have any child "port" nodes will not have mask_port_map set, and for non-device tree platforms mask_port_map will only exist as a quirk for specific PCI device + vendor IDs, or as a kernel module parameter, but will not be set by default. Therefore, the common thing is that mask_port_map is only set if you do not want to use all ports (as defined by Offset 0Ch: PI – Ports Implemented register), but instead only want to use the ports in mask_port_map. If mask_port_map is not set, all ports are available. Thus, ahci_ignore_port() must be able to handle an empty mask_port_map. Fixes: 8c87215dd3a2 ("ata: libahci_platform: support non-consecutive port numbers") Fixes: 2c202e6c4f4d ("ata: libahci_platform: Do not set mask_port_map when not needed") Fixes: c9b5be909e65 ("ahci: Introduce ahci_ignore_port() helper") Reported-by: Marek Szyprowski Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ide/10b31dd0-d0bb-4f76-9305-2195c3e17670@samsung.com/ Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski Co-developed-by: Damien Le Moal Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250225141612.942170-2-cassel@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel

Merge tag 'ata-6.14-rc4' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/libata/linux

2025-02-21T02:05:24Z

Pull ata fix from Niklas Cassel: - Fix an unintentional masking of AHCI ports when the device tree does not define port child nodes (Damien) * tag 'ata-6.14-rc4' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/libata/linux: ata: libahci_platform: Do not set mask_port_map when not needed

ata: libahci_platform: Do not set mask_port_map when not needed

2025-02-10T10:54:38Z

Commit 8c87215dd3a2 ("ata: libahci_platform: support non-consecutive port numbers") modified ahci_platform_get_resources() to allow identifying the ports of a controller that are defined as child nodes of the controller node in order to support non-consecutive port numbers (as defined by the platform device tree). However, this commit also erroneously sets bit 0 of hpriv->mask_port_map when the platform devices tree does not define port child nodes, to match the fact that the temporary default number of ports used in that case is 1 (which is also consistent with the fact that only index 0 of hpriv->phys[] is initialized with the call to ahci_platform_get_phy(). But doing so causes ahci_platform_init_host() to initialize and probe only the first port, even if this function determines that the controller has in fact multiple ports using the capability register of the controller (through a call to ahci_nr_ports()). This can be seen with the ahci_mvebu driver (Armada 385 SoC) with the second port declared as "dummy": ahci-mvebu f10a8000.sata: masking port_map 0x3 -> 0x1 ahci-mvebu f10a8000.sata: AHCI vers 0001.0000, 32 command slots, 6 Gbps, platform mode ahci-mvebu f10a8000.sata: 1/2 ports implemented (port mask 0x1) ahci-mvebu f10a8000.sata: flags: 64bit ncq sntf led only pmp fbs pio slum part sxs scsi host0: ahci-mvebu scsi host1: ahci-mvebu ata1: SATA max UDMA/133 mmio [mem 0xf10a8000-0xf10a9fff] port 0x100 irq 40 lpm-pol 0 ata2: DUMMY Fix this issue by removing setting bit 0 of hpriv->mask_port_map when the platform device tree does not define port child nodes. Reported-by: Klaus Kudielka Fixes: 8c87215dd3a2 ("ata: libahci_platform: support non-consecutive port numbers") Tested-by: Klaus Kudielka Signed-off-by: Damien Le Moal Acked-by: Josua Mayer Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250207232915.1439174-1-dlemoal@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel

Merge tag 'ata-6.14-rc1-part2' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/libata/linux

2025-01-31T19:07:56Z

Pull more ata updates from Niklas Cassel: - Add ATA_QUIRK_NOLPM for Samsung SSD 870 QVO drives (Daniel) - Ensure that PIO transfers using libata-sff cannot write outside the allocated buffer (me) * tag 'ata-6.14-rc1-part2' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/libata/linux: ata: libata-sff: Ensure that we cannot write outside the allocated buffer ata: libata-core: Add ATA_QUIRK_NOLPM for Samsung SSD 870 QVO drives

ata: libata-sff: Ensure that we cannot write outside the allocated buffer

2025-01-28T10:44:47Z

reveliofuzzing reported that a SCSI_IOCTL_SEND_COMMAND ioctl with out_len set to 0xd42, SCSI command set to ATA_16 PASS-THROUGH, ATA command set to ATA_NOP, and protocol set to ATA_PROT_PIO, can cause ata_pio_sector() to write outside the allocated buffer, overwriting random memory. While a ATA device is supposed to abort a ATA_NOP command, there does seem to be a bug either in libata-sff or QEMU, where either this status is not set, or the status is cleared before read by ata_sff_hsm_move(). Anyway, that is most likely a separate bug. Looking at __atapi_pio_bytes(), it already has a safety check to ensure that __atapi_pio_bytes() cannot write outside the allocated buffer. Add a similar check to ata_pio_sector(), such that also ata_pio_sector() cannot write outside the allocated buffer. Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Reported-by: reveliofuzzing Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ide/CA+-ZZ_jTgxh3bS7m+KX07_EWckSnW3N2adX3KV63y4g7M4CZ2A@mail.gmail.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250127154303.15567-2-cassel@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel

ata: libata-core: Add ATA_QUIRK_NOLPM for Samsung SSD 870 QVO drives

2025-01-27T14:16:11Z

Disabling link power management on Samsung SSD 870 QVO drives to make them work again after the switch of the default LPM policy to low. Testing so far has shown that regular Samsung SSD 870 (the non QVO variants) do not need it and work fine with the default LPM policy. Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Fixes: 7627a0edef54 ("ata: ahci: Drop low power policy board type") Signed-off-by: Daniel Baumann Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ide/ac64a484-022c-42a0-95bc-1520333b1536@debian.org/ Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel