Re: [PATCH v5 3/8] scsi: pm8001: use sas_find_attached_phy_id() instead of open coded

[Jason Yan <yanaijie@huawei.com>]

On 2022/9/28 6:57, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 9/27/22 21:39, Jason Yan wrote:
>> The attached phy id finding is open coded. Now we can replace it with
>> sas_find_attached_phy_id(). To keep consistent, the return value of
>> pm8001_dev_found_notify() is also changed to -ENODEV after calling
>> sas_find_attathed_phy_id() failed.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jason Yan <yanaijie@huawei.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Jack Wang <jinpu.wang@ionos.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/scsi/pm8001/pm8001_sas.c | 18 ++++++------------
>>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/pm8001/pm8001_sas.c b/drivers/scsi/pm8001/pm8001_sas.c
>> index 8e3f2f9ddaac..042c0843de1a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/pm8001/pm8001_sas.c
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/pm8001/pm8001_sas.c
>> @@ -645,22 +645,16 @@ static int pm8001_dev_found_notify(struct domain_device *dev)
>>   	pm8001_device->dcompletion = &completion;
>>   	if (parent_dev && dev_is_expander(parent_dev->dev_type)) {
>>   		int phy_id;
>> -		struct ex_phy *phy;
>> -		for (phy_id = 0; phy_id < parent_dev->ex_dev.num_phys;
>> -		phy_id++) {
>> -			phy = &parent_dev->ex_dev.ex_phy[phy_id];
>> -			if (SAS_ADDR(phy->attached_sas_addr)
>> -				== SAS_ADDR(dev->sas_addr)) {
>> -				pm8001_device->attached_phy = phy_id;
>> -				break;
>> -			}
>> -		}
>> -		if (phy_id == parent_dev->ex_dev.num_phys) {
>> +
>> +		phy_id = sas_find_attached_phy_id(&parent_dev->ex_dev, dev);
>> +		if (phy_id == -ENODEV) {
>>   			pm8001_dbg(pm8001_ha, FAIL,
>>   				   "Error: no attached dev:%016llx at ex:%016llx.\n",
>>   				   SAS_ADDR(dev->sas_addr),
>>   				   SAS_ADDR(parent_dev->sas_addr));
>> -			res = -1;
>> +			res = phy_id;
> 
> Nit:
> 
> res = -ENODEV would be a lot clearer.
> Or do:
> 
> 		if (phy_id < 0) {
> 			...
> 			ret = phy_id;
> 		} ...
> 

This boils down to personal preferences. I'd like to change to the 
latter one if no objections.

Thanks,
Jason

> No ?
> 
>> +		} else {
>> +			pm8001_device->attached_phy = phy_id;
>>   		}
>>   	} else {
>>   		if (dev->dev_type == SAS_SATA_DEV) {
>