Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] opa_vnic: fix check on record->event, incorrect
 operator used
To:     Colin King <colin.king@canonical.com>,
        Niranjana Vishwanathapura <niranjana.vishwanathapura@intel.com>,
        Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20190404100439.19696-1-colin.king@canonical.com>
From:   Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@intel.com>
Message-ID: <fb140949-383e-731b-95b1-c75c2f85dadd@intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 4 Apr 2019 07:23:45 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20190404100439.19696-1-colin.king@canonical.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 4/4/2019 6:04 AM, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> 
> The check on record->event is always true because the wrong operator
> is being used, used && instead of ||
> 
> Addresses-Coverity: ("Constant expression result")
> Fixes: fae7a699a925 ("opa_vnic: Convert vport_idr to XArray")
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> ---
>   drivers/infiniband/ulp/opa_vnic/opa_vnic_vema.c | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/ulp/opa_vnic/opa_vnic_vema.c b/drivers/infiniband/ulp/opa_vnic/opa_vnic_vema.c
> index 76cd09410d9a..be5befd92d16 100644
> --- a/drivers/infiniband/ulp/opa_vnic/opa_vnic_vema.c
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/ulp/opa_vnic/opa_vnic_vema.c
> @@ -869,7 +869,7 @@ static void opa_vnic_event(struct ib_event_handler *handler,
>   	      record->event, dev_name(&record->device->dev),
>   	      record->element.port_num);
>   
> -	if (record->event != IB_EVENT_PORT_ERR ||
> +	if (record->event != IB_EVENT_PORT_ERR &&
>   	    record->event != IB_EVENT_PORT_ACTIVE)
>   		return;
>   
> 

Missed this in code review. Thanks!

Acked-by: Dennis Dalessandro <dennis.dalessandro@intel.com>