On 2020-06-10 05:11, Roman Bolshakov wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 01:27:45PM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
>>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_def.h b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_def.h
>>> index 42dbf90d4651..de9c1604c575 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_def.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_def.h
>>> @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@ typedef struct {
>>> uint8_t al_pa;
>>> uint8_t area;
>>> uint8_t domain;
>>> -} le_id_t;
>>> +} __packed le_id_t;
>>
>> Now I am totally confused. le_id_t (and why does be_id_t not need it?) are
>> not used inside either of the reported data structure (cmd_entry_t,
>> ms_iocb_entry_t, request_t, struct ctio_crc2_to_fw, struct ctio7_to_24xx,
>> struct ctio_to_2xxx) which the bot reports. I must oversee something.
>
> I also had the thought that both fields should be packed for sake of
> consistency because there is fcp_hdr with be_id_t sid/did and
> fcp_hdr_le with le_id_t sid/did. You also seem to be correct, about your
> concerns. I overlooked that only ctio_crc2_to_fw and ctio7_to_24xx have
> le_id_t initiator_id field.
It's only now that I noticed that the build failures are reported by
sparse (C=1). So the build failures may indicate a bug in sparse.
Bart.
