From d5c3eb26d9ad78a2705ec675dd2399e985c5ee52 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Chris Leech <cleech@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 14:10:53 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] scsi: libfc: Don't have fc_exch_find log errors on a new
exchange
With the error message I added in "libfc: sanity check cpu number
extracted from xid" I didn't account for the fact that fc_exch_find is
called with FC_XID_UNKNOWN at the start of a new exchange if we are the
responder.
It doesn't come up with the initiator much, but that's basically every
exchange for a target. By checking the xid for FC_XID_UNKNOWN first, we
not only prevent the erroneous error message, but skip the unnecessary
lookup attempt as well.
[mkp: applied by hand due to conflict with Hannes' libfc patch series]
Signed-off-by: Chris Leech <cleech@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Ewan D. Milne <emilne@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
---
drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_exch.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_exch.c b/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_exch.c
index 442a6c1d5efcc..42bcf7f3a0f90 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_exch.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/libfc/fc_exch.c
@@ -939,6 +939,9 @@ static struct fc_exch *fc_exch_find(struct fc_exch_mgr *mp, u16 xid)
struct fc_exch *ep = NULL;
u16 cpu = xid & fc_cpu_mask;
+ if (xid == FC_XID_UNKNOWN)
+ return NULL;
+
if (cpu >= nr_cpu_ids || !cpu_possible(cpu)) {
pr_err("host%u: lport %6.6x: xid %d invalid CPU %d\n:",
lport->host->host_no, lport->port_id, xid, cpu);