On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 03:39:58PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 2/22/22 06:04, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> @@ -613,10 +614,10 @@ static int sg_scsi_ioctl(struct request_queue *q, fmode_t mode,
>> err = req->result & 0xff; /* only 8 bit SCSI status */
>> if (err) {
>> - if (req->sense_len && req->sense) {
>> - bytes = (OMAX_SB_LEN > req->sense_len) ?
>> - req->sense_len : OMAX_SB_LEN;
>> - if (copy_to_user(sic->data, req->sense, bytes))
>> + if (scmd->sense_len && scmd->sense_buffer) {
>> + bytes = (OMAX_SB_LEN > scmd->sense_len) ?
>> + scmd->sense_len : OMAX_SB_LEN;
>> + if (copy_to_user(sic->data, scmd->sense_buffer, bytes))
>> err = -EFAULT;
>> }
>> } else {
>
> This change would be a good opportunity to remove the two superfluous
> parentheses from the above code.
Or switch to use the min or min_t macro, yes.
>
>> diff --git a/include/scsi/scsi_cmnd.h b/include/scsi/scsi_cmnd.h
>> index 3e432e25645ac..47add5b32f460 100644
>> --- a/include/scsi/scsi_cmnd.h
>> +++ b/include/scsi/scsi_cmnd.h
>> @@ -112,6 +112,7 @@ struct scsi_cmnd {
>> reconnects. Probably == sector
>> size */
>> + unsigned sense_len;
>> unsigned char *sense_buffer;
>> /* obtained by REQUEST SENSE when
>> * CHECK CONDITION is received on original
>
> Isn't "unsigned int" preferred over "unsigned" in new code?
checkpatch states that, but for absolutely no reason.
