Re: [PATCH v9 9/9] scsi: ibmvfc: handle extended FPIN events

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] Unused list head and assigned but unused local variables in kunit test function.
--

commit e69daead7ba4a1176ce3e9bde4970bed18450907
Author: Dave Marquardt <davemarq@linux.ibm.com>

scsi: ibmvfc: handle extended FPIN events

Implement support for extended FPIN messages received via the
asynchronous sub-queue, completing full FPIN functionality.

> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc_kunit.c b/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc_kunit.c
> index 7aaed4f64f26b..80e7f8e0fd700 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc_kunit.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc_kunit.c

[ ... ]

> @@ -256,9 +257,143 @@ static void ibmvfc_full_fpin_test(struct kunit *test)
>  	scsi_host_put(vhost->host);
>  }
>  
> +#define IBMVFC_TEST_FPIN_EXT(fs, ev, stat, crq) {				\
> +	struct ibmvfc_async_crq_event ae = { .type = IBMVFC_ASYNC_CRQ_SUB };	\
> +	(crq).valid = 0x80;							\
> +	(crq).flags = IBMVFC_ASYNC_IS_FPIN_EXT;					\
> +	(crq).link_state = IBMVFC_AE_LS_LINK_UP;				\
> +	(crq).fpin_status = (fs);						\
> +	(crq).event = cpu_to_be16(IBMVFC_AE_FPIN);				\
> +	(crq).wwpn = cpu_to_be64(tgt->wwpn);					\
> +	(crq).fpin_data.flags = IBMVFC_FPIN_EVENT_TYPE_VALID;			\
> +	(crq).fpin_data.event_type = cpu_to_be16((ev));				\
> +	ae.subq = *(struct ibmvfc_async_sub_crq *)&(crq);			\
> +	pre = READ_ONCE(rport->fpin_stats.stat);				\
> +	ibmvfc_handle_async(&ae, vhost);					\
> +	flush_workqueue(vhost->fpin_workq);					\
> +	post = READ_ONCE(rport->fpin_stats.stat);				\
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * ibmvfc_extended_fpin_test - unit test for extended FPIN events
> + * @test: pointer to kunit structure
> + *
> + * Note: This test exercises extended FPIN code paths but does not check
> + * that statistics are correctly updated.
> + *
> + * Return: void
> + */
> +static void ibmvfc_extended_fpin_test(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> +	enum ibmvfc_ae_fpin_status fs;
> +	struct ibmvfc_async_subq_fpin crq[IBMVFC_AE_FPIN_CONGESTION_CLEARED+1] = {};
> +	struct ibmvfc_async_subq_fpin
> +		crqcn[IBMVFC_AE_FPIN_PORT_CONGESTED][FPIN_CONGN_DEVICE_SPEC+1] = {};
> +	struct ibmvfc_async_subq_fpin crqportdg[FPIN_LI_DEVICE_SPEC+1] = {};
> +	struct ibmvfc_target *tgt;
> +	struct ibmvfc_host *vhost;
> +	struct fc_rport *rport;
> +	LIST_HEAD(evt_doneq);
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +	u64 pre, post;

[Severity: Low]
Are evt_doneq, pre, and post unused in ibmvfc_extended_fpin_test()?

The function declares LIST_HEAD(evt_doneq) which is never used. It also
declares and assigns pre and post variables (via the IBMVFC_TEST_FPIN_EXT
macro and manually later in the function) but never evaluates them. Could this
leave dead code and potentially trigger compiler warnings for unused variables?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260911021910.1038128-1-tyreld@linux.ibm.com?part=9