smb: client: relax WARN_ON_ONCE(SMBDIRECT_SOCKET_*) checks in recv_done() and smbd_co...

smb: client: relax WARN_ON_ONCE(SMBDIRECT_SOCKET_*) checks in recv_done() and smbd_conn_upcall()

sc->first_error might already be set and sc->status
is thus unexpected, so this should avoid the WARN[_ON]_ONCE()
if sc->first_error is already set and have a usable error path.

While there set sc->first_error as soon as possible.

This is done based on a problem seen in similar places on
the server. And there it was already very useful in order
to find the problem when we have a meaningful WARN_ONCE()
that prints details about the connection.

This is much more useful:

[  309.560973] expected[NEGOTIATE_NEEDED] != RDMA_CONNECT_RUNNING
first_error=0 local=192.168.0.200:445 remote=192.168.0.100:60445
[  309.561034] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 78 at transport_rdma.c:643
recv_done+0x2fa/0x3d0 [ksmbd]

than what we had before (only):

[  894.140316] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 116 at
fs/smb/server/transport_rdma.c:642 recv_done+0x308/0x360 [ksmbd]

Fixes: 58dfba8a2d4e ("smb: client/smbdirect: replace SMBDIRECT_SOCKET_CONNECTING with more detailed states")
Cc: Steve French <smfrench@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Talpey <tom@talpey.com>
Cc: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com>
Cc: Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@kernel.org>
Cc: Paulo Alcantara <pc@manguebit.org>
Cc: linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org
Cc: samba-technical@lists.samba.org
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Acked-by: Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Steve French <stfrench@microsoft.com>