From patchwork Fri Dec 24 07:07:27 2021 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Christophe JAILLET X-Patchwork-Id: 12698859 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68908C433F5 for ; Fri, 24 Dec 2021 07:07:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1351744AbhLXHHa (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Dec 2021 02:07:30 -0500 Received: from smtp07.smtpout.orange.fr ([80.12.242.129]:53425 "EHLO smtp.smtpout.orange.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1351735AbhLXHHa (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Dec 2021 02:07:30 -0500 Received: from pop-os.home ([86.243.171.122]) by smtp.orange.fr with ESMTPA id 0efon3FeU65jH0efonacMZ; Fri, 24 Dec 2021 08:07:29 +0100 X-ME-Helo: pop-os.home X-ME-Auth: YWZlNiIxYWMyZDliZWIzOTcwYTEyYzlhMmU3ZiQ1M2U2MzfzZDfyZTMxZTBkMTYyNDBjNDJlZmQ3ZQ== X-ME-Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2021 08:07:29 +0100 X-ME-IP: 86.243.171.122 From: Christophe JAILLET To: james.smart@broadcom.com, dick.kennedy@broadcom.com, jejb@linux.ibm.com, martin.petersen@oracle.com Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Christophe JAILLET Subject: [PATCH 2/2] scsi: lpfc: Make sure to completely clear some bitmaps Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2021 08:07:27 +0100 Message-Id: <78647b840c6e83b9b185541b12382c30a99d1788.1640328930.git.christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.32.0 In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org When the 'phba->fcf.fcf_rr_bmask' bitmap is cleared, the code makes the assumption that it fits in only 1 long. Depending on the value of LPFC_SLI4_FCF_TBL_INDX_MAX, this may be wrong and only part of the bitmap would be cleared. Up to now, LPFC_SLI4_FCF_TBL_INDX_MAX is 32, so it is not an issue. But using bitmap_zero() is more future proof. Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET --- drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hbadisc.c | 7 ++++--- drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c | 3 +-- 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hbadisc.c b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hbadisc.c index 816fc406135b..5f142ee639ad 100644 --- a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hbadisc.c +++ b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hbadisc.c @@ -1517,7 +1517,8 @@ lpfc_sli4_clear_fcf_rr_bmask(struct lpfc_hba *phba) { struct lpfc_fcf_pri *fcf_pri; struct lpfc_fcf_pri *next_fcf_pri; - memset(phba->fcf.fcf_rr_bmask, 0, sizeof(*phba->fcf.fcf_rr_bmask)); + + bitmap_zero(phba->fcf.fcf_rr_bmask, LPFC_SLI4_FCF_TBL_INDX_MAX); spin_lock_irq(&phba->hbalock); list_for_each_entry_safe(fcf_pri, next_fcf_pri, &phba->fcf.fcf_pri_list, list) { @@ -2476,8 +2477,8 @@ static int lpfc_sli4_fcf_pri_list_add(struct lpfc_hba *phba, if (new_fcf_pri->fcf_rec.priority <= current_fcf_pri) { list_add(&new_fcf_pri->list, &phba->fcf.fcf_pri_list); if (new_fcf_pri->fcf_rec.priority < current_fcf_pri) { - memset(phba->fcf.fcf_rr_bmask, 0, - sizeof(*phba->fcf.fcf_rr_bmask)); + bitmap_zero(phba->fcf.fcf_rr_bmask, + LPFC_SLI4_FCF_TBL_INDX_MAX); /* fcfs_at_this_priority_level = 1; */ phba->fcf.eligible_fcf_cnt = 1; } else diff --git a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c index 1bc0db572d9e..9ea1b0db42a6 100644 --- a/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c +++ b/drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c @@ -20220,8 +20220,7 @@ lpfc_check_next_fcf_pri_level(struct lpfc_hba *phba) * Clear the rr_bmask and set all of the bits that are at this * priority. */ - memset(phba->fcf.fcf_rr_bmask, 0, - sizeof(*phba->fcf.fcf_rr_bmask)); + bitmap_zero(phba->fcf.fcf_rr_bmask, LPFC_SLI4_FCF_TBL_INDX_MAX); spin_lock_irq(&phba->hbalock); list_for_each_entry(fcf_pri, &phba->fcf.fcf_pri_list, list) { if (fcf_pri->fcf_rec.flag & LPFC_FCF_FLOGI_FAILED)