From: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Tyrel Datwyler <tyreld@linux.ibm.com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: ibmvscsi: Don't use rc uninitialized in ibmvscsi_do_work
Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2019 20:23:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190603032344.GA26021@archlinux-epyc> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87blzgnvhx.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
Hi Michael,
On Sun, Jun 02, 2019 at 08:15:38PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Hi Nathan,
>
> It's always preferable IMHO to keep any initialisation as localised as
> possible, so that the compiler can continue to warn about uninitialised
> usages elsewhere. In this case that would mean doing the rc = 0 in the
> switch, something like:
I am certainly okay with implementing this in a v2. I mulled over which
would be preferred, I suppose I guessed wrong :) Thank you for the
review and input.
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvscsi.c b/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvscsi.c
> index 727c31dc11a0..7ee5755cf636 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvscsi.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvscsi.c
> @@ -2123,9 +2123,6 @@ static void ibmvscsi_do_work(struct ibmvscsi_host_data *hostdata)
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(hostdata->host->host_lock, flags);
> switch (hostdata->action) {
> - case IBMVSCSI_HOST_ACTION_NONE:
> - case IBMVSCSI_HOST_ACTION_UNBLOCK:
> - break;
> case IBMVSCSI_HOST_ACTION_RESET:
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(hostdata->host->host_lock, flags);
> rc = ibmvscsi_reset_crq_queue(&hostdata->queue, hostdata);
> @@ -2142,7 +2139,10 @@ static void ibmvscsi_do_work(struct ibmvscsi_host_data *hostdata)
> if (!rc)
> rc = ibmvscsi_send_crq(hostdata, 0xC001000000000000LL, 0);
> break;
> + case IBMVSCSI_HOST_ACTION_NONE:
> + case IBMVSCSI_HOST_ACTION_UNBLOCK:
> default:
> + rc = 0;
> break;
> }
>
>
> But then that makes me wonder if that's actually correct?
>
> If we get an action that we don't recognise should we just throw it away
> like that? (by doing hostdata->action = IBMVSCSI_HOST_ACTION_NONE). Tyrel?
However, because of this, I will hold off on v2 until Tyrel can give
some feedback.
Thanks,
Nathan
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Tyrel Datwyler <tyreld@linux.ibm.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: ibmvscsi: Don't use rc uninitialized in ibmvscsi_do_work
Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2019 20:23:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190603032344.GA26021@archlinux-epyc> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87blzgnvhx.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
Hi Michael,
On Sun, Jun 02, 2019 at 08:15:38PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Hi Nathan,
>
> It's always preferable IMHO to keep any initialisation as localised as
> possible, so that the compiler can continue to warn about uninitialised
> usages elsewhere. In this case that would mean doing the rc = 0 in the
> switch, something like:
I am certainly okay with implementing this in a v2. I mulled over which
would be preferred, I suppose I guessed wrong :) Thank you for the
review and input.
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvscsi.c b/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvscsi.c
> index 727c31dc11a0..7ee5755cf636 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvscsi.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvscsi.c
> @@ -2123,9 +2123,6 @@ static void ibmvscsi_do_work(struct ibmvscsi_host_data *hostdata)
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(hostdata->host->host_lock, flags);
> switch (hostdata->action) {
> - case IBMVSCSI_HOST_ACTION_NONE:
> - case IBMVSCSI_HOST_ACTION_UNBLOCK:
> - break;
> case IBMVSCSI_HOST_ACTION_RESET:
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(hostdata->host->host_lock, flags);
> rc = ibmvscsi_reset_crq_queue(&hostdata->queue, hostdata);
> @@ -2142,7 +2139,10 @@ static void ibmvscsi_do_work(struct ibmvscsi_host_data *hostdata)
> if (!rc)
> rc = ibmvscsi_send_crq(hostdata, 0xC001000000000000LL, 0);
> break;
> + case IBMVSCSI_HOST_ACTION_NONE:
> + case IBMVSCSI_HOST_ACTION_UNBLOCK:
> default:
> + rc = 0;
> break;
> }
>
>
> But then that makes me wonder if that's actually correct?
>
> If we get an action that we don't recognise should we just throw it away
> like that? (by doing hostdata->action = IBMVSCSI_HOST_ACTION_NONE). Tyrel?
However, because of this, I will hold off on v2 until Tyrel can give
some feedback.
Thanks,
Nathan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-03 3:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-31 18:53 [PATCH] scsi: ibmvscsi: Don't use rc uninitialized in ibmvscsi_do_work Nathan Chancellor
2019-05-31 18:53 ` Nathan Chancellor
2019-06-02 10:15 ` Michael Ellerman
2019-06-02 10:15 ` Michael Ellerman
2019-06-03 3:23 ` Nathan Chancellor [this message]
2019-06-03 3:23 ` Nathan Chancellor
2019-06-03 23:30 ` Tyrel Datwyler
2019-06-03 8:45 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-06-03 22:19 ` [PATCH v2] " Nathan Chancellor
2019-06-03 22:19 ` Nathan Chancellor
2019-06-03 23:25 ` Tyrel Datwyler
2019-06-03 23:25 ` Tyrel Datwyler
2019-06-03 23:34 ` Tyrel Datwyler
2019-06-03 23:34 ` Tyrel Datwyler
2019-06-03 23:35 ` Tyrel Datwyler
2019-06-03 23:35 ` Tyrel Datwyler
2019-06-03 23:44 ` [PATCH v3] " Nathan Chancellor
2019-06-03 23:44 ` Nathan Chancellor
2019-06-03 23:58 ` Tyrel Datwyler
2019-06-03 23:58 ` Tyrel Datwyler
2019-06-05 2:39 ` Martin K. Petersen
2019-06-05 2:39 ` Martin K. Petersen
2019-06-05 11:08 ` Michael Ellerman
2019-06-05 11:08 ` Michael Ellerman
2019-06-05 11:08 ` Michael Ellerman
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=20190603032344.GA26021@archlinux-epyc \
--to=natechancellor@gmail.com \
--cc=clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com \
--cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=tyreld@linux.ibm.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.