linux-kernel - Re: [patch] scsi: revert "[SCSI] Get rid of scsi

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 2 Jan 2008 17:58:51 -0800 (PST)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
cc:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] scsi: revert "[SCSI] Get rid of scsi_cmnd->done"



On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
> > 
> > To say that another way:
> > 
> >  "the code is functionally equivalent, EXCEPT IT ISN'T, and it's 
> >   known to be broken".
> > 
> > wouldn't you say my version is more honest and correct?
> 
> No.  Just because a bug appears when a particular piece of code is in
> and disappears when it is reverted doesn't automatically equate to the
> code in question being buggy.

But it *DOES* mean that it's not equivalent.

> Look at the taxonomy of the bug.  This is the form of the error:
> 
> buffer I/O error on device sr0, logical block 20304
> attempt to access beyond end of device
> sr0: rw=0, want=81224, limit=40944
> 
> The last limit is the most suggestive, that comes straight from
> bdev->bd_inode->i_size>>9 and is supposed to be the size of the block
> device in 512 byte blocks. For a 4.7GB DVD, it's a little small.
> Nothing in the sr code sets this directly (although it does come from
> get_blkdev() for the first opener).  pktcdvd does set it, though ... and
> probably wrongly if the drive in question isn't UDF formatted.

.. but you're ignoring the fact that if pktcdvd sets it wrong, then it 
should be visible with the pre-commit kernel *also*.

In other words, you continue to ignore the fact that BEHAVIOUR CHANGED.

Why?

		Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/