On 7/29/26 11:52 PM, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> Hi Tyrel,
>
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 05:01:41PM -0700, Tyrel Datwyler wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc-core.c
>> b/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc-core.c
>> index 81d9229bf388..ffb579816e84 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc-core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc-core.c
>> @@ -6073,6 +6119,30 @@ static void ibmvfc_do_work(struct ibmvfc_host *vhost)
>> }
>> }
>>
>> + list_for_each_entry(tgt, &vhost->nvme_scrqs.targets, queue) {
>> + if (tgt->action == IBMVFC_TGT_ACTION_DEL_RPORT) {
>> + tgt_dbg(tgt, "Deleteing NVMe rport\n");
>> + nvme_rport = tgt->nvme_remote_port;
>> + list_del(&tgt->queue);
>> + ibmvfc_set_tgt_action(tgt,
>> IBMVFC_TGT_ACTION_DELETED_RPORT);
>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(vhost->host->host_lock,
>> flags);
>> + if (nvme_rport)
>> + ibmvfc_nvme_unregister_remoteport(tgt);
>> + timer_delete_sync(&tgt->timer);
>> + kref_put(&tgt->kref, ibmvfc_release_tgt);
>> + return;
>> + } else if (rport && tgt->action ==
>> IBMVFC_TGT_ACTION_DEL_AND_LOGOUT_RPORT) {
>> + tgt_dbg(tgt, "Deleting NVMe rport with
>> outstanding I/O\n");
>> + nvme_rport = tgt->nvme_remote_port;
>> + ibmvfc_set_tgt_action(tgt,
>> IBMVFC_TGT_ACTION_LOGOUT_DELETED_RPORT);
>> + tgt->init_retries = 0;
>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(vhost->host->host_lock,
>> flags);
>> + if (nvme_rport)
>> + ibmvfc_nvme_unregister_remoteport(tgt);
>> + return;
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> if (vhost->state == IBMVFC_INITIALIZING) {
>> if (vhost->action == IBMVFC_HOST_ACTION_TGT_DEL_FAILED)
>> {
>> if (vhost->reinit) {
>
> There is a warning from clang after this change landed in -next as
> commit 696d1cc2aaa2 ("scsi: ibmvfc: process NVMe/FC rports in work
> thread"), breaking the build when -Werror is enabled:
>
> drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc-core.c:6154:15: error: variable 'rport' is
> uninitialized when used here [-Werror,-Wuninitialized]
> 6154 | } else if (rport && tgt->action ==
> IBMVFC_TGT_ACTION_DEL_AND_LOGOUT_RPORT) {
> | ^~~~~
>
> Sashiko appears to point this out as well:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/[email protected]/
>
> But I am not sure that its suggestion to use nvme_rport is correct given
> the context of this code, hence just the report from my end.
>
I've already arrived at the conculsion that I will have to spin a v3 of this
series based on a few of the issues raised. Thanks for the heads up on the clang
warning.
-Tyrel
