Re: [PATCH 6/6] scsi: libsas: factor out sas_ex_add_dev()

Jason Yan
2022-12-08T08:07:20Z

On 2022/12/5 17:31, John Garry wrote:
> On 04/12/2022 08:16, Jason Yan wrote:
>> Factor out sas_ex_add_dev() to be consistent with sas_ata_add_dev() and
>> unify the error handling.
>>
>> Cc: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Jason Yan <yanaijie@huawei.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c | 68 +++++++++++++++++-------------
>>   1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c
>> b/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c
>> index 747f4fc795f4..3c72b167d43a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c
>> @@ -751,13 +751,46 @@ static void sas_ex_get_linkrate(struct
>> domain_device *parent,
>>       child->pathways = min(child->pathways, parent->pathways);
>>   }
>> +static int sas_ex_add_dev(struct domain_device *parent, struct ex_phy
>> *phy,
>> +              struct domain_device *child, int phy_id)
>> +{
>> +    struct sas_rphy *rphy;
>> +    int res;
>> +
>> +    child->dev_type = SAS_END_DEVICE;
>> +    rphy = sas_end_device_alloc(phy->port);
>> +    if (unlikely(!rphy))
>
> nit: this is not fastpath so unlikely can be avoided
>

ok. It is only a hint for the compiler so not a big deal. I can delete it.

>> +        return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> +    child->tproto = phy->attached_tproto;
>> +    sas_init_dev(child);
>> +
>> +    child->rphy = rphy;
>> +    get_device(&rphy->dev);
>> +    rphy->identify.phy_identifier = phy_id;
>> +    sas_fill_in_rphy(child, rphy);
>> +
>> +    list_add_tail(&child->disco_list_node, &parent->port->disco_list);
>> +
>> +    res = sas_notify_lldd_dev_found(child);
>> +    if (res) {
>> +        pr_notice("notify lldd for device %016llx at %016llx:%02d
>> returned 0x%x\n",
>> +                SAS_ADDR(child->sas_addr),
>> +                SAS_ADDR(parent->sas_addr), phy_id, res);
>
> nit: these lines could be aligned with (, as it was before

Nice catch. Will fix.

>
>> +        sas_rphy_free(child->rphy);
>> +        list_del(&child->disco_list_node);
>> +        return res;
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>>   static struct domain_device *sas_ex_discover_end_dev(
>>       struct domain_device *parent, int phy_id)
>>   {
>>       struct expander_device *parent_ex = &parent->ex_dev;
>>       struct ex_phy *phy = &parent_ex->ex_phy[phy_id];
>>       struct domain_device *child = NULL;
>> -    struct sas_rphy *rphy;
>>       int res;
>>       if (phy->attached_sata_host || phy->attached_sata_ps)
>> @@ -787,44 +820,21 @@ static struct domain_device
>> *sas_ex_discover_end_dev(
>>       if ((phy->attached_tproto & SAS_PROTOCOL_STP) ||
>> phy->attached_sata_dev) {
>>           res = sas_ata_add_dev(parent, phy, child, phy_id);
>> -        if (res)
>> -            goto out_free;
>>       } else if (phy->attached_tproto & SAS_PROTOCOL_SSP) {
>> -        child->dev_type = SAS_END_DEVICE;
>> -        rphy = sas_end_device_alloc(phy->port);
>> -        /* FIXME: error handling */
>
> so has the error handling been fixed now?

IIUC, the error handling is ok so this comment can be deleted.

Thanks,
Jason