linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi disk: Use its own buffer for the vpd request

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:	Sat, 31 Aug 2013 20:48:00 +0100
From:	Nix <nix@...eri.org.uk>
To:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:	Bernd Schubert <bernd.schubert@...tmail.fm>,
	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, nick.cheng@...ca.com.tw,
	stable@...r.kernel.org, Douglas Gilbert <dgilbert@...erlog.com>,
	"James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi disk: Use its own buffer for the vpd request

On 31 Aug 2013, Greg KH said:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 11:01:56AM +0100, Nix wrote:
>> On 1 Aug 2013, Bernd Schubert said:
>> 
>> > Once I noticed that scsi_get_vpd_page() works fine from other function
>> > calls and that it is not 0x89, but already 0x0 that fails fixing it became
>> > easy.
>> >
>> > Nix, any chance you could verify it also works for you?
>> 
>> As an aside, this commit does indeed fix the bug I reported, but it
>> doesn't seem to have gone anywhere, not even into -stable.
>> 
>> Is it held up somehow?
>> 
>> (stable has
>> 
>> commit 0ac10bd036f0f3b8ce7ac2390446eab9531c72eb
>> Author: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
>> Date:   Tue Jul 30 22:58:34 2013 -0400
>> 
>>     SCSI: Don't attempt to send extended INQUIRY command if skip_vpd_pages is set
>> 
>> which IIRC was eventually found not to be necessary, because this fix
>> works fine instead?)
>> 
>> Possibly I'm misremembering the order of month-old events and Martin's
>> fix was eventually considered better... in which case, sorry for the noise.
>
> Is that other patch even needed anymore, now that Martin's patch is in
> the tree?

My understanding is that this patch is rather better, since Martin's
patch prevents sending of the extended INQUIRY command at all: this one
just uses a reduced buffer size, but can still issue the command. (But I
may be misunderstanding everything.)

-- 
NULL && (void)
--
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/