On Tue, 2019-02-12 at 00:06 -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 10:05:02AM -0500, Ewan D. Milne wrote: > > The change to use dma_set_mask_and_coherent() incorrectly made a second > > call with the 32 bit DMA mask value when the call with the 64 bit DMA > > mask value succeeded. This resulted in NVMe/FC connections failing due > > to corrupted data buffers, and various other SCSI/FCP I/O errors. > > Ooops, sorry. > > > /* Set the device DMA mask size */ > > - if (dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&pdev->dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64)) || > > - dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&pdev->dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32))) > > - return error; > > + if (dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&pdev->dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64)) != 0) > > + if (dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&pdev->dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32)) != 0) > > But this still looks obsfuctating, why not: > > error = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&pdev->dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64)); > if (error) > error = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&pdev->dev, > DMA_BIT_MASK(32))); > if (error) > return error; I agree that making the flow of control explicit would be good, but... It looks like this would introduce a different problem. "error" is set to -ENODEV earlier in the two functions so that the various error paths will return that value. If it is overwritten with a successful result from the call to dma_set_mask_and_coherent() but a later call to e.g. ioremap() fails, the functions will incorrectly return a value indicating that they have succeeded. It also appears as if the patches to hptiop, hisi_sas and bfa need to be fixed up. I don't have a test environment for these, although I might be able to modify the test environment for bfa. Martin/James, what about the others? -Ewan
