The patch titled
Subject: drivers/scsi/ufs: fix incorrect return value about SUCCESS and FAILED
has been added to the -mm tree. Its filename is
ufs-fix-incorrect-return-value-about-success-and-failed.patch
Before you just go and hit "reply", please:
a) Consider who else should be cc'ed
b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well
c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a
reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
The -mm tree is included into linux-next and is updated
there every 3-4 working days
------------------------------------------------------
From: Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: drivers/scsi/ufs: fix incorrect return value about SUCCESS and FAILED
Currently the UFS host driver has returned incorrect values for SUCCESS
and FAILED. Fix it to return the correct value to the upper layer.
Signed-off-by: Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@xxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Santosh Y <santoshsy@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 10 ++++++----
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff -puN drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c~ufs-fix-incorrect-return-value-about-success-and-failed drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
--- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c~ufs-fix-incorrect-return-value-about-success-and-failed
+++ a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
@@ -1163,6 +1163,8 @@ static int ufshcd_task_req_compl(struct
if (task_result != UPIU_TASK_MANAGEMENT_FUNC_COMPL &&
task_result != UPIU_TASK_MANAGEMENT_FUNC_SUCCEEDED)
task_result = FAILED;
+ else
+ task_result = SUCCESS;
} else {
task_result = FAILED;
dev_err(&hba->pdev->dev,
@@ -1556,7 +1558,7 @@ ufshcd_issue_tm_cmd(struct ufs_hba *hba,
goto out;
}
clear_bit(free_slot, &hba->tm_condition);
- return ufshcd_task_req_compl(hba, free_slot);
+ err = ufshcd_task_req_compl(hba, free_slot);
out:
return err;
}
@@ -1580,7 +1582,7 @@ static int ufshcd_device_reset(struct sc
tag = cmd->request->tag;
err = ufshcd_issue_tm_cmd(hba, &hba->lrb[tag], UFS_LOGICAL_RESET);
- if (err)
+ if (err == FAILED)
goto out;
for (pos = 0; pos < hba->nutrs; pos++) {
@@ -1620,7 +1622,7 @@ static int ufshcd_host_reset(struct scsi
if (hba->ufshcd_state == UFSHCD_STATE_RESET)
return SUCCESS;
- return (ufshcd_do_reset(hba) == SUCCESS) ? SUCCESS : FAILED;
+ return ufshcd_do_reset(hba);
}
/**
@@ -1652,7 +1654,7 @@ static int ufshcd_abort(struct scsi_cmnd
spin_unlock_irqrestore(host->host_lock, flags);
err = ufshcd_issue_tm_cmd(hba, &hba->lrb[tag], UFS_ABORT_TASK);
- if (err)
+ if (err == FAILED)
goto out;
scsi_dma_unmap(cmd);
_
Subject: Subject: drivers/scsi/ufs: fix incorrect return value about SUCCESS and FAILED
Patches currently in -mm which might be from linkinjeon@xxxxxxxxx are
drivers-scsi-ufs-reverse-the-ufshcd_is_device_present-logic.patch
drivers-scsi-ufs-fix-evaluation-of-task_failed-status.patch
ufs-fix-incorrect-return-value-about-success-and-failed.patch
ufs-add-scsi-host-lock-push-down-for-ufs.patch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe mm-commits" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
