linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 part1 1/4] sg_io: pass request_queue to blk_verify

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:	Fri, 24 May 2013 09:53:30 +0200
From:	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tj@...nel.org,
	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>,
	Doug Gilbert <dgilbert@...erlog.com>,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 part1 1/4] sg_io: pass request_queue to blk_verify_command

Il 24/05/2013 09:50, James Bottomley ha scritto:
> On Fri, 2013-05-24 at 09:43 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 24/05/2013 09:36, James Bottomley ha scritto:
>>> On Thu, 2013-05-23 at 15:58 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>>> Adjust the blk_verify_command function to let it look at per-queue
>>>> data.  This will be done in the next patch.
>>>
>>> This is not a bug fix.  This is an enabler for your complex and to my
>>> mind dubious rework of the SG_IO command filter.  I'm running out of
>>> ways to say please don't mix bug fixes with features, because this
>>> redesignating of the original patch set as part 1 and parts 2,3 doesn't
>>> satisfy the requirement.
>>
>> I made it part 1/2/3 because parts 2/3 depend on part 1.  It makes
>> dependency tracking easier, at least in my mind.
>>
>> If you have another solution that does not require passing request_queue
>> to blk_verify_command, I'm all ears.
> 
> That's a circular response that doesn't answer the question.  The actual
> question is: what is simple fix for the bug that isn't entangled with
> enabling the SG_IO per device type whitelist feature.
> 
>>> Does anyone in the real world actually care about this bug?
>>
>> Yes, or I would move on and not waste so much time on this.
> 
> Fine, so produce a simple fix for this bug which we can discuss that's
> not tied to this feature.

Honestly, I have no idea how this is even possible.

Paolo

--
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/