Hello Dan,
Thanks for reporting these issues, We will get back with a patch to
fix this issue.
-Regards
Devesh
On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 4:12 PM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hello Selvin Xavier,
>
> The patch 1ac5a4047975: "RDMA/bnxt_re: Add bnxt_re RoCE driver" from
> Feb 10, 2017, leads to the following static checker warning:
>
> drivers/infiniband/hw/bnxt_re/qplib_rcfw.c:95 __send_message() warn: test_bit() takes a bit number
> drivers/infiniband/hw/bnxt_re/qplib_rcfw.c:104 __send_message() warn: test_bit() takes a bit number
> drivers/infiniband/hw/bnxt_re/qplib_rcfw.c:110 __send_message() warn: test_bit() takes a bit number
> drivers/infiniband/hw/bnxt_re/qplib_rcfw.c:232 bnxt_qplib_rcfw_send_message() warn: test_bit() takes a bit number
> drivers/infiniband/hw/bnxt_re/qplib_rcfw.c:430 bnxt_qplib_deinit_rcfw() warn: test_bit() takes a bit number
> drivers/infiniband/hw/bnxt_re/qplib_rcfw.c:524 bnxt_qplib_init_rcfw() warn: test_bit() takes a bit number
>
>
> drivers/infiniband/hw/bnxt_re/qplib_rcfw.h
> 164 unsigned long flags;
> 165 #define FIRMWARE_INITIALIZED_FLAG BIT(0)
> 166 #define FIRMWARE_FIRST_FLAG BIT(31)
> 167 #define FIRMWARE_TIMED_OUT BIT(3)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Defined here.
>
> 168 wait_queue_head_t waitq;
>
> drivers/infiniband/hw/bnxt_re/qplib_rcfw.c
> 81 static int __send_message(struct bnxt_qplib_rcfw *rcfw, struct cmdq_base *req,
> 82 struct creq_base *resp, void *sb, u8 is_block)
> 83 {
> 84 struct bnxt_qplib_cmdqe *cmdqe, **cmdq_ptr;
> 85 struct bnxt_qplib_hwq *cmdq = &rcfw->cmdq;
> 86 struct bnxt_qplib_crsq *crsqe;
> 87 u32 sw_prod, cmdq_prod;
> 88 unsigned long flags;
> 89 u32 size, opcode;
> 90 u16 cookie, cbit;
> 91 int pg, idx;
> 92 u8 *preq;
> 93
> 94 opcode = req->opcode;
> 95 if (!test_bit(FIRMWARE_INITIALIZED_FLAG, &rcfw->flags) &&
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> We're actually testing "1 << BIT(0)" here. Which is fine because we
> do it consistently and because it happens to not overlap with any of the
> other flags and because we don't use "test_bit(FIRMWARE_FIRST_FLAG ...".
> But it's not the right way to use this function.
>
> 96 (opcode != CMDQ_BASE_OPCODE_QUERY_FUNC &&
> 97 opcode != CMDQ_BASE_OPCODE_INITIALIZE_FW)) {
> 98 dev_err(&rcfw->pdev->dev,
> 99 "QPLIB: RCFW not initialized, reject opcode 0x%x",
> 100 opcode);
> 101 return -EINVAL;
> 102 }
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
