On 2019/10/17 10:45, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 2019-10-11 20:25, zhengbin wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
>> index 5447738..d5e29c5 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
>> @@ -255,6 +255,13 @@ int __scsi_execute(struct scsi_device *sdev, const
>> unsigned char *cmd,
>> struct scsi_request *rq;
>> int ret = DRIVER_ERROR << 24;
>>
>> + /*
>> + * Zero-initialize sshdr for those callers that check the *sshdr
>> + * contents even if no sense data is available.
>> + */
>> + if (sshdr)
>> + memset(sshdr, 0, sizeof(struct scsi_sense_hdr));
>> +
>> req = blk_get_request(sdev->request_queue,
>> data_direction == DMA_TO_DEVICE ?
>> REQ_OP_SCSI_OUT : REQ_OP_SCSI_IN, BLK_MQ_REQ_PREEMPT);
> Although I don't have a strong opinion about this, I'm still wondering
> whether 'sshdr' should be initialized in __scsi_execute() or by its caller.
@jejb, @martin, any suggestion?
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/sr_ioctl.c b/drivers/scsi/sr_ioctl.c
>> index ffcf902..335cfdd 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/sr_ioctl.c
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/sr_ioctl.c
>> @@ -206,6 +206,11 @@ int sr_do_ioctl(Scsi_CD *cd, struct packet_command *cgc)
>>
>> /* Minimal error checking. Ignore cases we know about, and report the
>> rest. */
>> if (driver_byte(result) != 0) {
>> + if (!scsi_sense_valid(sshdr)) {
>> + err = -EIO;
>> + goto out;
>> + }
>> +
>> switch (sshdr->sense_key) {
>> case UNIT_ATTENTION:
>> SDev->changed = 1;
> Shouldn't this be a separate patch?
OK, will send a separate patch
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
>
> .
>
