linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/6] firewire: SBP-2 highlevel driver

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]

Message-ID: <4642477A.3000801@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 09 May 2007 18:13:14 -0400
From:	Kristian Høgsberg <krh@...hat.com>
To:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
CC:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux1394-devel <linux1394-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] firewire: SBP-2 highlevel driver

Stefan Richter wrote:
> Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
>> I was trying to be clever and only allocate the host once the device had
>> been discovered and initialized.  I have now changed the code to just
>> allocate the host up front and use the hostdata mechanism for the
>> sbp2_device struct, which also addresses the host life cycle comments
>> below.
> 
> I have doubts.  IMO the previous code is 100% correct as long as 1 SBP-2
> target LU maps to 1 Scsi_Host.
> 
> The lifetime of the Scsi_Host would only be longer than that of the LU
> if all LUs (or all LUs at the same initiator port) would be added beneath
> the same instance of Scsi_Host.  Then the lifetime of the Scsi_Host would
> be that of the fw-sbp2 driver, or that of fw-sbp2's representation of a
> FireWire bus.

In the patch, the sbp2_device is now allocated with the scsi_host and is the 
hostdata part of the host struct.  This mean we have to add all the LUs from 
the unit directory corresponding to the sbp2_device struct to that host.  Is 
that a problem?  I think we had this discussion before, but I still don't 
understand why this approach isn't feasible.

Kristian


-
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/