On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 11:33 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > 4.5-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > ------------------ > > From: Raghava Aditya Renukunta <raghavaaditya.renuku...@pmcs.com> > > commit ecc479e00db8eb110b200afe1effcb3df20ca7ae upstream. > > During EEH recovery number of online CPU's might change thereby changing > the number of MSIx vectors. Since each fib is allocated to a vector, > changes in the number of vectors causes fib to be sent thru invalid > vectors.In addition the correct number of MSIx vectors is not updated in > the INIT struct sent to the controller, when it is reinitialized. > > Fixed by reassigning vectors to fibs based on the updated number of MSIx > vectors and updating the INIT structure before sending to controller.
Really?
[...]
> --- a/drivers/scsi/aacraid/linit.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/aacraid/linit.c
> @@ -1404,8 +1404,18 @@ static int aac_acquire_resources(struct
>
> aac_adapter_enable_int(dev);
>
> - if (!dev->sync_mode)
> + /*max msix may change after EEH
> + * Re-assign vectors to fibs
> + */
> + aac_fib_vector_assign(dev);
> +
> + if (!dev->sync_mode) {
> + /* After EEH recovery or suspend resume, max_msix count
> + * may change, therfore updating in init as well.
> + */
> aac_adapter_start(dev);
> + dev->init->Sa_MSIXVectors = cpu_to_le32(dev->max_msix);
Aren't these two lines in the wrong order?
Ben.
> + }
> return 0;
>
> error_iounmap:
--
Ben Hutchings
This sentence contradicts itself - no actually it doesn't.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
