On 12/02/2016 01:15 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>
> -static struct vscsiif_request *scsifront_pre_req(struct vscsifrnt_info *info)
> +static int scsifront_do_request(struct vscsifrnt_info *info,
> + struct vscsifrnt_shadow *shadow)
> {
> struct vscsiif_front_ring *ring = &(info->ring);
> struct vscsiif_request *ring_req;
> + struct scsi_cmnd *sc = shadow->sc;
> uint32_t id;
> + int i, notify;
> +
> + if (RING_FULL(&info->ring))
> + return -EBUSY;
>
> id = scsifront_get_rqid(info); /* use id in response */
> if (id >= VSCSIIF_MAX_REQS)
> - return NULL;
> + return -EBUSY;
> +
> + info->shadow[id] = shadow;
> + shadow->rqid = id;
>
> ring_req = RING_GET_REQUEST(&(info->ring), ring->req_prod_pvt);
> -
> ring->req_prod_pvt++;
>
> - ring_req->rqid = (uint16_t)id;
> + ring_req->rqid = id;
> + ring_req->act = shadow->act;
> + ring_req->ref_rqid = shadow->ref_rqid;
> + ring_req->nr_segments = shadow->nr_segments;
Shouldn't req_prod_pvt be incremented after you've copied everything? (I
realize that there is not error until everything has been copied but still.)
> @@ -473,44 +496,14 @@ static int map_data_for_request(struct vscsifrnt_info
> *info,
> }
>
> if (seg_grants)
> - ring_req->nr_segments = VSCSIIF_SG_GRANT | seg_grants;
> + shadow->nr_segments = VSCSIIF_SG_GRANT | seg_grants;
Are we guaranteed that seg_grants is not going to have VSCSIIF_SG_GRANT
bit set?
-boris
--
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
