Re: [PATCH v9 5/9] scsi: ibmvfc: add interrupt routine for asynchronous sub CRQ

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] Missing ampersand (`&`) before `vhost->host->host_lock` in `spin_lock_irqsave` and `spin_unlock_irqrestore` calls.
--

commit cd128234f59fb01f2631d2a91579282cbf2d281b
Author: Dave Marquardt <davemarq@linux.ibm.com>

scsi: ibmvfc: add interrupt routine for asynchronous sub CRQ

This commit introduces an interrupt handler and a draining routine for
asynchronous sub-CRQ events from the adapter. The handler consumes pending
entries before re-enabling interrupts and checks for newly arrived entries
to close any races.

> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc-core.c b/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc-core.c
> index daec81f48857d..553fca31cb3aa 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc-core.c
> @@ -4376,6 +4376,60 @@ static struct ibmvfc_crq *ibmvfc_next_scrq(struct ibmvfc_queue *scrq)
[ ... ]
> +static void ibmvfc_drain_async_subq(struct ibmvfc_queue *scrq)
> +{
> +	struct ibmvfc_host *vhost = scrq->vhost;
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +	struct ibmvfc_crq *crq;
> +	int done = 0;
> +
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(vhost->host->host_lock, flags);

[Severity: Low]
Does this cause a compilation error? In modern kernels, host_lock within 
Scsi_Host is embedded as a spinlock_t rather than a pointer. Passing it by 
value to spin_lock_irqsave without the & address-of operator causes a strict 
type mismatch.

[ ... ]
> +			crq->valid = 0;
> +			wmb();	/* complete write */
> +		} else
> +			done = 1;
> +	}
> +	spin_unlock(scrq->q_lock);
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(vhost->host->host_lock, flags);

[Severity: Low]
Is the & address-of operator also missing here before vhost->host->host_lock 
for spin_unlock_irqrestore?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260909-ibmvfc-fpin-support-v8-0-b27183b055af@linux.ibm.com?part=5