On Wed, 3 May 2017, 1:58pm, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > > Hello everybody, > > While looking into Coverity ID 1402011 I ran into the following piece of code > at drivers/scsi/qedf/qedf_io.c:2057: > > /* Fill FC header */ > fc_hdr = &(tm_req->req_fc_hdr); > sid = fcport->sid; > did = fcport->rdata->ids.port_id; > __fc_fill_fc_hdr(fc_hdr, FC_RCTL_DD_UNSOL_CMD, sid, did, > FC_TYPE_FCP, FC_FC_FIRST_SEQ | FC_FC_END_SEQ | > FC_FC_SEQ_INIT, 0); > > The issue here is that the position of arguments in the call to > __fc_fill_fc_hdr() function do not match the ordering of the parameters: > > _sid_ is passed to _did_ > _did_ is passed to _sid_ > > this is the function prototype: > > static inline void __fc_fill_fc_hdr(struct fc_frame_header *fh, > enum fc_rctl r_ctl, > u32 did, u32 sid, enum fc_fh_type type, > u32 f_ctl, u32 parm_offset) > > My question here is if this is intentionala? This may have been but this code has been superseded by commit be086e7c53f1fac51eed14523b28f2214b548dd2.B > > In case it is not, I will send a patch to fix it. But first it would be great > to hear any comment about it. > > By the way... the same is happening at drivers/scsi/qedf/qedf_els.c:109 May be a bug here so you could send a patch. > > Thank you > -- > Gustavo A. R. Silva > > > >
