[PATCH v3 06/10] ufshcd: handle error from blk_ksm_register()

[Satya Tangirala]

Handle any error from blk_ksm_register() in the callers. Previously,
the callers ignored the return value because blk_ksm_register() wouldn't
fail as long as the request_queue didn't have integrity support too, but
as this is no longer the case, it's safer for the callers to just handle
the return value appropriately.

Signed-off-by: Satya Tangirala <satyat@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
 drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-crypto.c | 13 +++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-crypto.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-crypto.c
index d70cdcd35e43..0fcf9d6752f8 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-crypto.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-crypto.c
@@ -233,6 +233,15 @@ void ufshcd_init_crypto(struct ufs_hba *hba)
 void ufshcd_crypto_setup_rq_keyslot_manager(struct ufs_hba *hba,
 					    struct request_queue *q)
 {
-	if (hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_CRYPTO)
-		blk_ksm_register(&hba->ksm, q);
+	if (hba->caps & UFSHCD_CAP_CRYPTO) {
+		/*
+		 * This WARN_ON should never trigger since &hba->ksm won't be
+		 * "empty" (i.e. will support at least 1 crypto capability), a
+		 * UFS device's request queue doesn't support integrity, and
+		 * it also satisfies all the block layer constraints (i.e.
+		 * supports SG gaps, doesn't have chunk sectors, has a
+		 * sufficiently large supported max_segments per bio)
+		 */
+		WARN_ON(!blk_ksm_register(&hba->ksm, q));
+	}
 }
-- 
2.32.0.rc1.229.g3e70b5a671-goog