> On Oct 30, 2015, at 5:00 PM, Don Brace <brace77...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/30/2015 03:07 PM, Matthew R. Ochs wrote:
>>> On Oct 28, 2015, at 5:06 PM, Don Brace <don.br...@pmcs.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Kevin Barnett <kevin.barn...@pmcs.com>
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Scott Teel <scott.t...@pmcs.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Justin Lindley <justin.lind...@pmcs.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Kevin Barnett <kevin.barn...@pmcs.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Don Brace <don.br...@pmcs.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/scsi/hpsa.c | 535
>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>> drivers/scsi/hpsa.h | 27 ++
>>> drivers/scsi/hpsa_cmd.h | 14 +
>>> 3 files changed, 555 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/hpsa.c b/drivers/scsi/hpsa.c
>>> index 56526312..ca38a00 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/scsi/hpsa.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/hpsa.c
>>> @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@
>>>
>>> +static u64 hpsa_get_sas_address_from_report_physical(struct ctlr_info *h,
>>> + unsigned char *scsi3addr)
>>> +{
>>> + struct ReportExtendedLUNdata *physdev;
>>> + u32 nphysicals;
>>> + u64 sa = 0;
>>> + int i;
>>> +
>>> + physdev = kzalloc(sizeof(*physdev), GFP_KERNEL);
>>> + if (!physdev)
>>> + return 0;
>>> +
>>> + if (hpsa_scsi_do_report_phys_luns(h, physdev, sizeof(*physdev))) {
>>> + dev_err(&h->pdev->dev, "report physical LUNs failed.\n");
>>> + kfree(physdev);
>>> + return 0;
>>> + }
>>> + nphysicals = get_unaligned_be32(physdev->LUNListLength) / 24;
>>> +
>>> + for (i = 0; i < nphysicals; i++)
>>> + if (!memcmp(&physdev->LUN[i].lunid[0], scsi3addr, 8))
>>> + sa = get_unaligned_be64(&physdev->LUN[i].wwid[0]);
>> Don't you want to break out here if you found a match?
> Agreed.
>>
>>> +
>>> + kfree(physdev);
>>> +
>>> + return sa;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static void hpsa_get_sas_address(struct ctlr_info *h, unsigned char
>>> *scsi3addr,
>>> + struct hpsa_scsi_dev_t *dev)
>>> +{
>>> + int rc;
>>> + u64 sa = 0;
>>> +
>>> + if (is_hba_lunid(scsi3addr)) {
>>> + struct bmic_sense_subsystem_info *ssi;
>>> +
>>> + ssi = kzalloc(sizeof(*ssi), GFP_KERNEL);
>> What happens if this allocation fails? If the I/O can succeed without the
>> DMA buffer then you will run into trouble when deriving sa.
> Added check for NULL.
With these changes
Reviewed-by: Matthew R. Ochs <mro...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
