Messages in this thread | | | From | "Zou, Yi" <> | Date | Tue, 23 Aug 2011 00:23:15 -0700 | Subject | RE: [Open-FCoE] [PATCH 2/4] drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c: add missing test |
| |
> From nobody Mon Aug 22 15:57:42 CEST 2011 > From: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk> > To: Robert Love <robert.w.love@intel.com> > Cc: "James E.J. Bottomley" <JBottomley@parallels.com>,devel@open- > fcoe.org,linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Subject: [PATCH 2/4] drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c: add missing test > > From: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk> > > The initializations of both fcoe_nport_scsi_transport and > fcoe_vport_scsi_transport can fail, so test both of them. > > The semantic match that finds this problem is as follows: > (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/) > > // <smpl> > @r@ > identifier x,y,f!={PTR_ERR,ERR_PTR,ERR_CAST}; > statement S; > @@ > > x = f(...); > ( > if (\(x == NULL\|IS_ERR(x)\)) S > | > *if (\(y == NULL\|IS_ERR(y)\)) > { ... when != x > return ...; } > ) > // </smpl> > > Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk> > > --- > drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c | 13 +++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c b/drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c > index ba710e3..9f2e2f4 100644 > --- a/drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c > +++ b/drivers/scsi/fcoe/fcoe.c > @@ -1093,11 +1093,20 @@ static int __init fcoe_if_init(void) > /* attach to scsi transport */ > fcoe_nport_scsi_transport = > fc_attach_transport(&fcoe_nport_fc_functions); > + > + if (!fcoe_nport_scsi_transport) { > + printk(KERN_ERR > + "fcoe_nport: Failed to attach to the FC transport\n"); > + return -ENODEV; > + } > + > fcoe_vport_scsi_transport = > fc_attach_transport(&fcoe_vport_fc_functions); > > - if (!fcoe_nport_scsi_transport) { > - printk(KERN_ERR "fcoe: Failed to attach to the FC > transport\n"); > + if (!fcoe_vport_scsi_transport) { > + printk(KERN_ERR > + "fcoe_vport: Failed to attach to the FC transport\n"); > + fc_release_transport(fcoe_nport_scsi_transport); > return -ENODEV; > } >
I understand we were using -ENODEV before, but -ENOMEM is preferred here as that's the only err from fc_attach_transport.
Thanks, yi
| |