Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 11 Feb 2015 12:45:32 -0500 | From | Douglas Gilbert <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] [SCSI] sg: fix read() error reporting |
| |
On 15-02-11 11:32 AM, Tony Battersby wrote: > Fix SCSI generic read() incorrectly returning success after detecting an > error. > > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> > Signed-off-by: Tony Battersby <tonyb@cybernetics.com> > --- > > For inclusion in kernel 3.20. > > --- linux-3.19.0/drivers/scsi/sg.c.orig 2015-02-08 21:54:22.000000000 -0500 > +++ linux-3.19.0/drivers/scsi/sg.c 2015-02-10 09:26:09.000000000 -0500 > @@ -546,7 +546,7 @@ static ssize_t > sg_new_read(Sg_fd * sfp, char __user *buf, size_t count, Sg_request * srp) > { > sg_io_hdr_t *hp = &srp->header; > - int err = 0; > + int err = 0, err2; > int len; > > if (count < SZ_SG_IO_HDR) { > @@ -575,8 +575,8 @@ sg_new_read(Sg_fd * sfp, char __user *bu > goto err_out; > } > err_out: > - err = sg_finish_rem_req(srp); > - return (0 == err) ? count : err; > + err2 = sg_finish_rem_req(srp); > + return err ? : err2 ? : count;
Tony, Your point is well made.
I just don't like that last line, using a gcc extension that hasn't even made it into C11 (or C++11). Wouldn't: return err ? err : (err2 ? err2 : count);
be a bit better? I think the following snippet makes the intent clear but would it generate any more code: if (err || err2) return err ? err : err2; else return count;
Doug Gilbert
| |