linux-kernel - Re: Block: Trouble with kobject initialisation for blk_cmd

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20080916063112C.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Date:	Tue, 16 Sep 2008 06:31:18 +0900
From:	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
To:	eo@...ensachen.de
Cc:	fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp, jens.axboe@...cle.com,
	greg@...ah.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Block: Trouble with kobject initialisation for blk_cmd_filter

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 22:49:13 +0200
Elias Oltmanns <eo@...ensachen.de> wrote:

> FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> > On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 21:55:15 +0200
> > Elias Oltmanns <eo@...ensachen.de> wrote:
> >
> >> >> Jens, would it be better to just disable the cmdfilter stuff for
> >> >> 2.6.27? It's too late for another try to fix this broken stuff, I
> >> >> guess.
> >> >
> >> > Yeah, it's certainly starting to look like it... The amount of changes
> >> > to unbreak it are too large to submit now, so lets postpone it until
> >> > 2.6.28.
> >> 
> >> As far as I can make out, nothing has happened yet at this front. I've
> >> just verified that reverting the following commits (in that order) seems
> >> to be working nicely for me:
> >> 
> >> 2dc75d3c3b4
> >> bb23b431db7
> >> a4a778971b9
> >> 4beab5c623f
> >> 14e507b852e
> >> abf54393704
> >> 06a452e5b95
> >> 2b272d4f795
> >> 0b07de85a76
> >> 
> >> Is that what you had in mind? Will you take care of it?
> >
> > The following commit should disable the command filter feature:
> >
> > commit 2dc75d3c3b49c64fd26b4832a7efb75546cb3fc5
> > Author: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
> > Date:   Thu Sep 11 14:20:23 2008 +0200
> >
> >     block: disable sysfs parts of the disk command filter
> 
> Right, so it really is only the sysfs interface of the command filter
> that causes problems, is it?

Yeah, the way to use kobject for the sysfs interface caused the
problems. In addition, the commit log, 'block: disable sysfs parts of the disk
command filter' states that it disables only the sysfs interface but
the commit changes all the users not to use the command filter (that
is, nobody uses the command filter now). We should not see any
problems due to the command filter.


> Does that also mean that you are not
> unhappy with the command filter in linux-next either except for the
> sysfs interfae? I didn't realise that, sorry for the noise.

I guess that it would be better to rethink about how to implement the
sysfs interface because the current command filter is different from
the initial implementation. We could do better (simpler).
--
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/