tree ee7dd415c30b57215841214959d00c0470787e51
parent 1c2c1b4fbd413fd814807768d2aba9023722ed76
author Robert Love <robert.w.love@intel.com> 1378367247 +0000
committer Robert Love <robert.w.love@intel.com> 1381523140 -0700

libfcoe: Make fcoe_sysfs optional / fix fnic NULL exception

fnic doesn't use any of the create/destroy/enable/disable interfaces
either from the (legacy) module paramaters or the (new) fcoe_sysfs
interfaces. When fcoe_sysfs was introduced fnic wasn't changed since
it wasn't using the interfaces. libfcoe incorrectly assumed that that
all of its users were using fcoe_sysfs and when adding and deleting
FCFs would assume the existance of a fcoe_ctlr_device. fnic was not
allocating this structure because it doesn't care about the standard
user interfaces (fnic starts on link only). If/When libfcoe tried to use
the fcoe_ctlr_device's lock for the first time a NULL pointer exception
would be triggered.

Since fnic doesn't care about sysfs or user interfaces, the solution
is to drop libfcoe's assumption that all drivers are using fcoe_sysfs.

This patch accomplishes this by changing some of the structure
relationships.

We need a way to determine when a LLD is using fcoe_sysfs or not and
we can do that by checking for the existance of the fcoe_ctlr_device.
Prior to this patch, it was assumed that the fcoe_ctlr structure was
allocated with the fcoe_ctlr_device and immediately followed it in
memory. To reach the fcoe_ctlr_device we would simply go back in memory
from the fcoe_ctlr to get the fcoe_ctlr_device.

Since fnic doesn't allocate the fcoe_ctlr_device, we cannot keep that
assumption. This patch adds a pointer from the fcoe_ctlr to the
fcoe_ctlr_device. For bnx2fc and fcoe we will continue to allocate the
two structures together, but then we'll set the ctlr->cdev pointer
to point at the fcoe_ctlr_device. fnic will not change and will continue
to allocate the fcoe_ctlr itself, and ctlr->cdev will remain NULL.

When libfcoe adds fcoe_fcf's to the fcoe_ctlr it will check if ctlr->cdev
is set and only if so will it continue to interact with fcoe_sysfs.

Signed-off-by: Robert Love <robert.w.love@intel.com>
Acked-by: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Tested-by: Hiral Patel <hiralpat@cisco.com>