| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <5C524FE2.9070801@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2019 09:31:14 +0800
From: Jason Yan <yanaijie@...wei.com>
To: John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>, <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
<jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC: <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<zhaohongjiang@...wei.com>, <hare@...e.com>,
<dan.j.williams@...el.com>, <jthumshirn@...e.de>, <hch@....de>,
<huangdaode@...ilicon.com>, <chenxiang66@...ilicon.com>,
<xiexiuqi@...wei.com>, <tj@...nel.org>, <miaoxie@...wei.com>,
Ewan Milne <emilne@...hat.com>, Tomas Henzl <thenzl@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] scsi: libsas: optimize the debug print of the
revalidate process
On 2019/1/31 0:41, John Garry wrote:
> On 30/01/2019 08:24, Jason Yan wrote:
>> sas_rediscover() returns error code if discover failed for a expander
>> phy. And sas_ex_revalidate_domain() only returns the last phy's error
>> code. So when sas_revalidate_domain() prints the return value of the
>> discover process, we do not know if the revalidation for every phy is
>> successful or not. We just know the last bcast phy revalidation
>> succeeded or not.
>>
>> No need to return a error code for sas_ex_revalidate_domain() and
>> sas_rediscover(), and just print the debug log for each bcast phy
>> directly
>> in sas_rediscover().
>
> do we want to know about every PHY, or just the PHY where res != 0?
>
Here I mean every PHY that raises bcast.
>>
>
> I don't see any optimisation here. Maybe an improvement.
>
Thanks, I will change the wording.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Jason Yan <yanaijie@...wei.com>
>> CC: John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
>> CC: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@...e.de>
>> CC: Ewan Milne <emilne@...hat.com>
>> CC: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
>> CC: Tomas Henzl <thenzl@...hat.com>
>> CC: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
>> CC: Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_discover.c | 7 +++----
>> drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c | 11 ++++++-----
>> include/scsi/libsas.h | 2 +-
>> 3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_discover.c
>> b/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_discover.c
>> index 726ada9b8c79..ffc571a12916 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_discover.c
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_discover.c
>> @@ -500,7 +500,6 @@ static void sas_discover_domain(struct work_struct
>> *work)
>>
>> static void sas_revalidate_domain(struct work_struct *work)
>> {
>> - int res = 0;
>> struct sas_discovery_event *ev = to_sas_discovery_event(work);
>> struct asd_sas_port *port = ev->port;
>> struct sas_ha_struct *ha = port->ha;
>> @@ -521,10 +520,10 @@ static void sas_revalidate_domain(struct
>> work_struct *work)
>>
>> if (ddev && (ddev->dev_type == SAS_FANOUT_EXPANDER_DEVICE ||
>> ddev->dev_type == SAS_EDGE_EXPANDER_DEVICE))
>> - res = sas_ex_revalidate_domain(ddev);
>> + sas_ex_revalidate_domain(ddev);
>>
>> - pr_debug("done REVALIDATING DOMAIN on port %d, pid:%d, res 0x%x\n",
>> - port->id, task_pid_nr(current), res);
>> + pr_debug("done REVALIDATING DOMAIN on port %d, pid:%d\n",
>> + port->id, task_pid_nr(current));
>> out:
>> mutex_unlock(&ha->disco_mutex);
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c
>> b/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c
>> index 7b0e6dcef6e6..5cd720f93f96 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c
>> @@ -2062,7 +2062,7 @@ static int sas_rediscover_dev(struct
>> domain_device *dev, int phy_id, bool last)
>> * first phy,for other phys in this port, we add it to the port to
>> * forming the wide-port.
>> */
>> -static int sas_rediscover(struct domain_device *dev, const int phy_id)
>> +static void sas_rediscover(struct domain_device *dev, const int phy_id)
>> {
>> struct expander_device *ex = &dev->ex_dev;
>> struct ex_phy *changed_phy = &ex->ex_phy[phy_id];
>> @@ -2090,7 +2090,9 @@ static int sas_rediscover(struct domain_device
>> *dev, const int phy_id)
>> res = sas_rediscover_dev(dev, phy_id, last);
>> } else
>> res = sas_discover_new(dev, phy_id);
>> - return res;
>> +
>> + pr_debug("ex %016llx phy%d discover returned 0x%x\n",
>
> Hmmm.. this is not just discover, but also rediscover
>
Yes, will fix.
>> + SAS_ADDR(dev->sas_addr), phy_id, res);
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> @@ -2102,7 +2104,7 @@ static int sas_rediscover(struct domain_device
>> *dev, const int phy_id)
>> * Discover process only interrogates devices in order to discover the
>> * domain.
>> */
>> -int sas_ex_revalidate_domain(struct domain_device *port_dev)
>> +void sas_ex_revalidate_domain(struct domain_device *port_dev)
>> {
>> int res;
>> struct domain_device *dev = NULL;
>> @@ -2117,11 +2119,10 @@ int sas_ex_revalidate_domain(struct
>> domain_device *port_dev)
>> res = sas_find_bcast_phy(dev, &phy_id, i, true);
>
> this was missed
Yes, the return value of sas_find_bcast_phy() is actually unused, and
inside the function debug info has been printed. So we can directly
make it a void function.
>
>> if (phy_id == -1)
>> break;
>> - res = sas_rediscover(dev, phy_id);
>> + sas_rediscover(dev, phy_id);
>> i = phy_id + 1;
>> } while (i < ex->num_phys);
>> }
>> - return res;
>> }
>>
>> void sas_smp_handler(struct bsg_job *job, struct Scsi_Host *shost,
>> diff --git a/include/scsi/libsas.h b/include/scsi/libsas.h
>> index 420156cea3ee..e557bcb0c266 100644
>> --- a/include/scsi/libsas.h
>> +++ b/include/scsi/libsas.h
>> @@ -692,7 +692,7 @@ int sas_discover_root_expander(struct
>> domain_device *);
>>
>> void sas_init_ex_attr(void);
>>
>> -int sas_ex_revalidate_domain(struct domain_device *);
>> +void sas_ex_revalidate_domain(struct domain_device *);
>>
>> void sas_unregister_domain_devices(struct asd_sas_port *port, int gone);
>> void sas_init_disc(struct sas_discovery *disc, struct asd_sas_port *);
>>
>
>
>
> .
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists