linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] libata: Implement disk shock protection support

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: <48C91458.7090503@gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 11 Sep 2008 14:51:36 +0200
From:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
To:	Elias Oltmanns <eo@...ensachen.de>
CC:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>,
	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] libata: Implement disk shock protection support

Elias Oltmanns wrote:
> We mustn't release the lock between pulling the actions into eh_context
> and clearing eh_info, so I've designed ata_eh_pull_action() to be used
> instead of ata_eh_about_to_do().

Yes, right again.  :-)

> What about the following patch? Also, I've slipped in a minor comment
> fix to ata_eh_done() which probably doesn't warrant a separate patch; on
> the other hand, mixing things like that isn't quite the right thing
> either, so, perhaps I should drop it in the final version?

Hmmm... I think either way is okay but there's no harm in splitting
them.

> From: Elias Oltmanns <eo@...ensachen.de>
> Subject: [PATCH] libata: Implement disk shock protection support
> 
> On user request (through sysfs), the IDLE IMMEDIATE command with UNLOAD
> FEATURE as specified in ATA-7 is issued to the device and processing of
> the request queue is stopped thereafter until the specified timeout
> expires or user space asks to resume normal operation. This is supposed
> to prevent the heads of a hard drive from accidentally crashing onto the
> platter when a heavy shock is anticipated (like a falling laptop
> expected to hit the floor). In fact, the whole port stops processing
> commands until the timeout has expired in order to avoid any resets due
> to failed commands on another device.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Elias Oltmanns <eo@...ensachen.de>

Acked-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>

-- 
tejun
--
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/