From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39C644D9571; Mon, 28 Sep 2026 14:11:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.158.5 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790604717; cv=none; b=ccVNSYCM7scZiYENLfo0bQ9W3Cn7S8GxGAacQ7IsL5p1QaC5vM+JHwQxbNUaTwK+zWKepALneEYgDT9MelzzNAXbsWB32nYhbzwk5a9ZNFKeYSPMRrHKwMCJqKEPbNkcH3Ys1iKHDgNGcH4n04+3d4XfnHcRldfL56e6TA8KlqQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790604717; c=relaxed/simple; bh=2YRvEUrI5hwdkxAO4NWvX7lP5Y7hFTMB6g6IqcXKYbw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=mD7tkSUos+e+Lb9zuk0VVz5xaf3On+Cszcz9n4B7kz+CZy95p2iju488+agoM9GqiyqTgvX0qs6B4/kY3c6r337omS9o+ERUYeOVWzJYg9R7EEmlyzhNkI00blG7mi07+EanDZOy6XIiJTnCmRxdLVf2rUMQvjwG0Lmp68GvBh0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b=gk2FLQrb; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.158.5 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b="gk2FLQrb" Received: from pps.filterd (m0353725.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.11/8.18.1.11) with ESMTP id 68SBZq1o3971552; Mon, 28 Sep 2026 14:11:53 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=cc :content-type:date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:to; s=pp1; bh=f9QPaXFvkxSOFBxop1oKvpq4LVuhBv awOLd9eOd/GII=; b=gk2FLQrbhsTHOco9GDVQmYF5GCzxPAtx4+VIoiZOUxlzDc Sn/ZtfeL8XcnTsuUhiwg0Hu+fFhuUAknV5ijScIsfHfOEybd9lhrO+iYh+V2g2Dq IRXuZtIeIvKhEnj9AGlsMw17nMDVjEYVVNlkLaTuZ0Al4lCpgsL7dnMR69CtRGnn LLYazWnJ8wLYJ3je/wG3NXBjFxS5ckgguCIqqidRyUiErcz7MpmleELDG/YWtAc/ XGQDGNJe8lD4MLJQOq+maGo/KZobAML5XtCmhwAPBOTKb7xcSTJgsV5l1W9Bu6cw SzD6C43GEtkAvu8MlBmRtjbuFhXw62KCvvjlsODw== Received: from ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (dd.9e.1632.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [50.22.158.221]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 4gx4fe1gu7-1 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 28 Sep 2026 14:11:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.18.1.11/8.18.1.11) with ESMTP id 68SBHZwM2943238; Mon, 28 Sep 2026 14:11:52 GMT Received: from smtprelay02.dal12v.mail.ibm.com ([172.16.1.4]) by ppma13.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 4gxtkg5bw2-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 28 Sep 2026 14:11:52 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav05.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav05.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com [10.39.53.232]) by smtprelay02.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 68SEBqVY4194966 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 28 Sep 2026 14:11:52 GMT Received: from smtpav05.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9A1A58053; Mon, 28 Sep 2026 14:11:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav05.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B99258043; Mon, 28 Sep 2026 14:11:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d (unknown [9.61.160.252]) by smtpav05.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Mon, 28 Sep 2026 14:11:51 +0000 (GMT) From: Dave Marquardt To: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Cc: "Tyrel Datwyler" , sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 04/11] scsi: ibmvfc: add basic FPIN support In-Reply-To: <87o6dl1e59.fsf@linux.ibm.com> (Dave Marquardt's message of "Fri, 25 Sep 2026 11:36:50 -0500") References: <20260925044900.414340-1-tyreld@linux.ibm.com> <20260925044900.414340-5-tyreld@linux.ibm.com> <20260925050305.6F20E1F000FF@smtp.kernel.org> <87tsnd1f2r.fsf@linux.ibm.com> <87o6dl1e59.fsf@linux.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2026 09:11:51 -0500 Message-ID: <87pkxx5uu0.fsf@linux.ibm.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=FYWiV5+6 c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=6aba75a9 cx=c_pps a=AfN7/Ok6k8XGzOShvHwTGQ==:117 a=AfN7/Ok6k8XGzOShvHwTGQ==:17 a=VdqzKS8jKosA:10 a=VkNPw1HP01LnGYTKEx00:22 a=RnoormkPH1_aCDwRdu11:22 a=V8glGbnc2Ofi9Qvn3v5h:22 a=VnNF1IyMAAAA:8 a=VwQbUJbxAAAA:8 a=9iKCkZftw6WeuuriitQA:9 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Info: AW1haW4tMjYwOTI4MDA1NiBTYWx0ZWRfX/qYbXinUDpJe QZcxTtksMMieks2LPK2WC3vvX5/GlxvqNcaga9WeINGUWD1af8FlXVnYlYDLaYomMZZJENPCmMI K5BBcTmWJZEIOoice6IMuh4rExWKQ6M= X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 6Lj4mi7Qg0RQ1Rr8KRIxsKsUkSDTNuSz X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details-Enc: AW1haW4tMjYwOTI4MDA1NiBTYWx0ZWRfXw4dVCMWnPPl5 S6s68i9ZUXkBIln2abW7+sxczro5NC8/5AzhuRUGMENbPeGbpD2QI63q0Th5iJtr2STZTAmxdNc /UBy2YDudS+N84n7gx04R1ci0O7BXLrNUuiqrd3lcXr1ZgBoxH8Z/tXjnCeSDUlpQXdU25pWl2O lEvWGCyOI/WNt0UZYGiBWFVQgf0i2JbXLVR6CIMEUvVFJjaql/TOsm/k0kkfJPbmJp8mrJvx5Rv EMOu1TxYzergNStb6gitopLMbWxMIR7Dq4xpkRhN7ceMfxL1KXg7yNUl1ZxTlMiohY4k2QGcH1J cGsVodwSdm3XZOF5//133lfQIj1P70LkooRJBfSGovHnG2uwtiynucviwUsrOhcIRUjr9T5sJRq alcsGXKuvrR8BTmVJkrKe1YpeSi/aTRWK+CCMdPTIFCTiwyS8SQt2VchVjnpSnQzRdasn2I8+HB 8pvIDtbdaYFx0jSqlpw== X-Proofpoint-GUID: 6Lj4mi7Qg0RQ1Rr8KRIxsKsUkSDTNuSz X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1176,Hydra:6.1.134,FMLib:17.12.100.49 definitions=2026-09-28_03,2026-09-21_02,2025-10-01_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 adultscore=0 clxscore=1015 impostorscore=0 spamscore=0 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 suspectscore=0 classifier=typeunknown authscore=0 authtc= authcc= route=outbound adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.22.0-2609040000 definitions=main-2609280056 Dave Marquardt writes: > Dave Marquardt writes: > >> sashiko-bot@kernel.org writes: >> >>> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider: >>> - [Medium] scsi: ibmvfc: missing scsi_host_put() in test success path >>> - [Medium] scsi: ibmvfc: missing host_lock around ibmvfc_handle_async() in KUnit test >>> -- >>> >>> commit 29ab8a9a78c94679b8187ae357d2978336830599 >>> Author: Dave Marquardt >>> >>> scsi: ibmvfc: add basic FPIN support >>> >>> Implement support for a basic level of Fabric Performance Impact >>> Notifications (FPIN) in the ibmvfc driver to enable monitoring of >>> fabric congestion and link integrity events. This includes async event >>> handling and KUnit test infrastructure. >>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc_kunit.c b/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc_kunit.c >>>> new file mode 100644 >>>> index 0000000000000..ec52285b0aa22 >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc_kunit.c >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,149 @@ >>> [ ... ] >>>> +static void ibmvfc_async_fpin_test(struct kunit *test) >>>> +{ >>> [ ... ] >>>> + vhost = ibmvfc_get_first_vhost(); >>>> + if (!vhost) >>>> + kunit_skip(test, "No ibmvfc devices available"); >>> [ ... ] >>>> + for (fs = IBMVFC_AE_FPIN_LINK_CONGESTED; fs <= IBMVFC_AE_FPIN_CONGESTION_CLEARED; fs++) { >>>> + ae[fs].valid = 0x80; >>>> + ae[fs].link_state = IBMVFC_AE_LS_LINK_UP; >>>> + ae[fs].fpin_status = fs; >>>> + ae[fs].event = cpu_to_be64(IBMVFC_AE_FPIN); >>>> + ae[fs].scsi_id = cpu_to_be64(tgt->scsi_id); >>>> + ae[fs].wwpn = cpu_to_be64(tgt->wwpn); >>>> + ae[fs].node_name = cpu_to_be64(tgt->ids.node_name); >>>> + ibmvfc_handle_async(&ae[fs], vhost); >>> >>> [Severity: Medium] >>> Does this invocation of ibmvfc_handle_async() need to be protected by >>> the host_lock? >>> >>> If a concurrent device removal via ibmvfc_remove() sets vhost->state to >>> IBMVFC_HOST_OFFLINE and destroys fpin_workq just before this handles the >>> async event, could queue_work() be called on a freed workqueue? >> >> Yes, this routine should acquire the host_lock before calling ibmvfc_handle_async. > > So, the host_lock is taken early in the routine and held in this case. > I'm getting mixed messages in my research on whether return or something > like KUNIT_FAIL() is required after kunit_skip(). I will add return > statements. Contemplating this a little longer, I don't think any change is needed here. I think this is a false positive by Sashiko. Is it confused by kunit_skip() calls? -Dave