Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 3/5] megasas: bugfix

[Markus Armbruster]

Please use a more descriptive title.  Suggest "megasas: Fix 

Cao jin <address@hidden> writes:

> msi_init returns non-zero value on both failure and success

This is a sentence, should end with a period.

Bug's impact?  Here's my guess.

msi_init() either succeeds and returns 0x50, or fails and returns a
negative errno.  If it succeeds, we mistakenly clear
MEGASAS_MASK_USE_MSI.  Its only use is in megasas_scsi_uninit(), via
megasas_use_msi().  There, we fail to msi_uninit() on unrealize due to
the bug.

I figure that's harmless if we destroy the device next.  This is the
common case.

If we don't destroy it, and then realize it again, msi_init() fails,
because there's no space at 0x50: the MSI capability we neglected to
delete is still there.  We report the problem to the user, then realize
the device anyway (I hate that, but it's a separate issue).

Marcel, can you confirm my analysis?

> Signed-off-by: Cao jin <address@hidden>
> CC: Hannes Reinecke <address@hidden>
> CC: Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden>
> ---
>  hw/scsi/megasas.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/scsi/megasas.c b/hw/scsi/megasas.c
> index a63a581..56fb645 100644
> --- a/hw/scsi/megasas.c
> +++ b/hw/scsi/megasas.c
> @@ -2348,7 +2348,7 @@ static void megasas_scsi_realize(PCIDevice *dev, Error 
> **errp)
>                            "megasas-queue", 0x40000);
>  
>      if (megasas_use_msi(s) &&
> -        msi_init(dev, 0x50, 1, true, false)) {
> +        msi_init(dev, 0x50, 1, true, false) < 0) {
>          s->flags &= ~MEGASAS_MASK_USE_MSI;
>      }
>      if (megasas_use_msix(s) &&
           msix_init(dev, 15, &s->mmio_io, b->mmio_bar, 0x2000,
                     &s->mmio_io, b->mmio_bar, 0x3800, 0x68)) {
           s->flags &= ~MEGASAS_MASK_USE_MSIX;
       }

This looks like the same bug, but it's actually okay, since msix_init()
returns 0 on success.  Suggest to test < 0 anyway so that future readers
don't get misled into thinking there's a bug like I was.

Marcel, this difference between msi_init() and msix_init() is just mean.
Please clean it up.