linux-kernel - Re: [SCSI PATCH] sd: max-retries becomes configurable

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:	Tue, 25 Sep 2012 01:21:54 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
CC:	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [SCSI PATCH] sd: max-retries becomes configurable

On 09/25/2012 12:06 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 17:00 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>
>>   drivers/scsi/sd.c |    4 ++++
>>   drivers/scsi/sd.h |    2 +-
>>   2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> I'm not opposed in principle to doing this (except that it should be a
> sysfs parameter like all our other controls), but what's the reasoning
> behind needing it changed?

<vendor hat on>

Periodically turns up as a useful field sledgehammer for solving 
problems, until the real problem is found and fixed.  Got tired of a 
very similar patch manually bouncing around the "hey, pssst, this worked 
for me" backchannel IT network.

</red hat>

Can you be more specific about sysfs location?  A runtime-writable (via 
sysfs!) module parameter for a module-wide default seemed appropriate.

	Jeff



--
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/