On 07/20/2015 03:17 PM, Michal Nazarewicz wrote:
On 07/08/2015 04:00 PM, Michal Nazarewicz wrote:
On Tue, Jul 07 2015, Krzysztof Opasiak wrote:
This patch replace dynamicly allocated luns array with static one.
This simplifies the code of mass storage function and modules.
It also fix issue with reporting wrong number of LUNs in GET_MAX_LUN
request. According to MS spec we should return the max index of valid
LUN, not the number of luns - 1.
This is no longer true, is it? Why my fix this bug has been solved, no?
As such, this should not go to stable. Or am I missing something?
On Mon, Jul 20 2015, Krzysztof Opasiak wrote:
Unfortunately it's still true. Your fix solved this bug partially. Now
we report nluns - 1 instead of FSG_LUN_MAX but in case of not contiguous
luns it is not enough.
Let's consider mass storage function with luns 0 1 3 5. nluns == 4 so in
GET_MAX_LUN we will return 3 (nluns - 1).
I don’t believe that’s accurate. See loop in my patch:
+ if (!opts->refcnt) {
+ for (nluns = i = 0; i < FSG_MAX_LUNS; ++i)
+ if (common->luns[i])
+ nluns = i + 1;
+ if (!nluns)
+ pr_warn("No LUNS defined, continuing anyway\n");
+ else
+ common->nluns = nluns;
+ pr_info("Number of LUNs=%u\n", common->nluns);
+ }
It iterates over all luns and if lun is non-NULL it sets nluns to index
of that lun plus one. So if luns[0], lun[1], lun[2], lun[3] and lun[5]
are set, common->nluns = 6.
Yeah I see it now. What I wrote was a problem before your patch but now
it seams to be ok, just nluns name is very misleading. Summing up, just
like you wrote this patch should not go to stable.
--
Krzysztof Opasiak
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
Samsung Electronics
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html