The assumption is that if tfd >= 0, then we have a valid major/minor pair

in stb.st_rdev to use in ioctl calls.  Therefore, even if we use the sysfs
block/dev entry to get our major/minor pair, we should really be using
tfd and not sysfd as it changes assumptions made later on.

Note: I actually don't like this.  I would prefer that in the case of a
kernel internal name that we skipped tfd altogether and went strait to
sysfs operation exclusively.  But that's just my preference.  I'm
concerned that sometime in the future we'll make the mistake of assuming
that tfd >= 0 means dv->devname is a fully qualified path name and not
a kernel internal name.  We don't now, but I could easily see it happening.

Signed-off-by: Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>

1 files changed, 6 insertions, 6 deletions

diff --git a/Manage.c b/Manage.c
index 043e3f6..9e450b9 100644
--- a/Manage.c
+++ b/Manage.c
@@ -386,7 +386,7 @@ int Manage_subdevs(char *devname, int fd,
 
 		next = dv->next;
 		jnext = 0;
-		tfd = -1;
+		tfd = sysfd = -1;
 
 		if (strcmp(dv->devname, "failed")==0 ||
 		    strcmp(dv->devname, "faulty")==0) {
@@ -461,17 +461,16 @@ int Manage_subdevs(char *devname, int fd,
 			}
 
 			sprintf(dname, "dev-%s", dv->devname);
-			sysfd = sysfs_open(fd2devnum(fd), dname, "block/dev");
-			if (sysfd >= 0) {
+			tfd = sysfs_open(fd2devnum(fd), dname, "block/dev");
+			if (tfd >= 0) {
 				char dn[20];
 				int mj,mn;
-				if (sysfs_fd_get_str(sysfd, dn, 20) > 0 &&
+				if (sysfs_fd_get_str(tfd, dn, 20) > 0 &&
 				    sscanf(dn, "%d:%d", &mj,&mn) == 2) {
 					stb.st_rdev = makedev(mj,mn);
 					found = 1;
 				}
-				close(sysfd);
-				sysfd = -1;
+				close(tfd);
 			}
 			if (!found) {
 				sysfd = sysfs_open(fd2devnum(fd), dname, "state");
@@ -481,6 +480,7 @@ int Manage_subdevs(char *devname, int fd,
 						dv->devname, devname);
 					return 1;
 				}
+				tfd = -1;
 			}
 		} else {
 			j = 0;