Re: [PATCH v2 25/33] ibmvfc: process NVMe/FC rports in work thread

[Nathan Chancellor]

Hi Tyrel,

On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 05:01:41PM -0700, Tyrel Datwyler wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc-core.c b/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc-core.c
> index 81d9229bf388..ffb579816e84 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc-core.c
> @@ -6073,6 +6119,30 @@ static void ibmvfc_do_work(struct ibmvfc_host *vhost)
>  			}
>  		}
>  
> +		list_for_each_entry(tgt, &vhost->nvme_scrqs.targets, queue) {
> +			if (tgt->action == IBMVFC_TGT_ACTION_DEL_RPORT) {
> +				tgt_dbg(tgt, "Deleteing NVMe rport\n");
> +				nvme_rport = tgt->nvme_remote_port;
> +				list_del(&tgt->queue);
> +				ibmvfc_set_tgt_action(tgt, IBMVFC_TGT_ACTION_DELETED_RPORT);
> +				spin_unlock_irqrestore(vhost->host->host_lock, flags);
> +				if (nvme_rport)
> +					ibmvfc_nvme_unregister_remoteport(tgt);
> +				timer_delete_sync(&tgt->timer);
> +				kref_put(&tgt->kref, ibmvfc_release_tgt);
> +				return;
> +			} else if (rport && tgt->action == IBMVFC_TGT_ACTION_DEL_AND_LOGOUT_RPORT) {
> +				tgt_dbg(tgt, "Deleting NVMe rport with outstanding I/O\n");
> +				nvme_rport = tgt->nvme_remote_port;
> +				ibmvfc_set_tgt_action(tgt, IBMVFC_TGT_ACTION_LOGOUT_DELETED_RPORT);
> +				tgt->init_retries = 0;
> +				spin_unlock_irqrestore(vhost->host->host_lock, flags);
> +				if (nvme_rport)
> +					ibmvfc_nvme_unregister_remoteport(tgt);
> +				return;
> +			}
> +		}
> +
>  		if (vhost->state == IBMVFC_INITIALIZING) {
>  			if (vhost->action == IBMVFC_HOST_ACTION_TGT_DEL_FAILED) {
>  				if (vhost->reinit) {

There is a warning from clang after this change landed in -next as
commit 696d1cc2aaa2 ("scsi: ibmvfc: process NVMe/FC rports in work
thread"), breaking the build when -Werror is enabled:

  drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc-core.c:6154:15: error: variable 'rport' is uninitialized when used here [-Werror,-Wuninitialized]
   6154 |                         } else if (rport && tgt->action == IBMVFC_TGT_ACTION_DEL_AND_LOGOUT_RPORT) {
        |                                    ^~~~~

Sashiko appears to point this out as well:

  https://lore.kernel.org/20260723005006.C7EE21F00A3A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/

But I am not sure that its suggestion to use nvme_rport is correct given
the context of this code, hence just the report from my end.

-- 
Cheers,
Nathan