On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 04:37:59PM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 10/21/2016 11:10 PM, Chris Leech wrote:
> >With the error message I added in "libfc: sanity check cpu number
> >extracted from xid" I didn't account for the fact that fc_exch_find is
> >called with FC_XID_UNKNOWN at the start of a new exchange if we are the
> >responder.
> >
> >It doesn't come up with the initiator much, but that's basically every
> >exchange for a target. By checking the xid for FC_XID_UNKNOWN first, we
> >not only prevent the erroneous error message, but skip the unnecessary
> >lookup attempt as well.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Chris Leech <cle...@redhat.com>
> >---
> > drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_exch.c | 3 +++
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >
> >diff --git a/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_exch.c b/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_exch.c
> >index 16ca31a..42cc403 100644
> >--- a/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_exch.c
> >+++ b/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_exch.c
> >@@ -910,6 +910,9 @@ static struct fc_exch *fc_exch_find(struct fc_exch_mgr
> >*mp, u16 xid)
> > struct fc_exch *ep = NULL;
> > u16 cpu = xid & fc_cpu_mask;
> >
> >+ if (xid == FC_XID_UNKNOWN)
> >+ return NULL;
> >+
> > if (cpu >= nr_cpu_ids || !cpu_possible(cpu)) {
> > printk_ratelimited(KERN_ERR
> > "libfc: lookup request for XID = %d, "
> >
> Does that still apply with my libfc patchset?
> I was under the impression I've fixed it already ...
I believe so, although it might need refreshing to fix up the context
change.
It looks like you made a change specifically for REC, but in target mode
with tcm_fc the first frame every new exchange comes in with RX_ID
unknown until we assign one.
Chris
--
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
