linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 2/4] scsi: ufs: Re-use exec_dev

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2024 19:54:06 +0000
From: Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>, "James E . J . Bottomley"
	<jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, "Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
CC: Bean Huo <beanhuo@...ron.com>, "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/4] scsi: ufs: Re-use exec_dev_cmd

> On 3/4/24 01:23, Avri Altman wrote:
> > +static int __exec_dev_cmd(struct ufs_hba *hba, struct ufshcd_lrb *lrbp,
> > +                       const u32 tag, int timeout)
> 
> Please choose a better name than __exec_dev_cmd. Function names in this file
> should start with the ufshcd_ prefix.
Done.

> 
> > @@ -3300,28 +3318,15 @@ static void ufshcd_dev_man_unlock(struct
> ufs_hba *hba)
> >   static int ufshcd_exec_dev_cmd(struct ufs_hba *hba,
> >               enum dev_cmd_type cmd_type, int timeout)
> >   {
> > -     DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK(wait);
> >       const u32 tag = hba->reserved_slot;
> > -     struct ufshcd_lrb *lrbp;
> > +     struct ufshcd_lrb *lrbp = &hba->lrb[tag];
> >       int err;
> >
> > -     lrbp = &hba->lrb[tag];
> > -     lrbp->cmd = NULL;
> >       err = ufshcd_compose_dev_cmd(hba, lrbp, cmd_type, tag);
> 
> Please restore the "lrbp->cmd = NULL" assignment. I don't think that it is safe to
> remove that assignment.
This is a redundant assignment - being set to null in ufshcd_compose_dev_cmd.

Thanks,
Avri
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bart.