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:	Thu, 2 Oct 2008 18:58:58 +0200
From:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Cc:	Nikanth Karthikesan <knikanth@...e.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] BUG: nr_phys_segments cannot be less than nr_hw_segments

On Thu, Oct 02 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
> The bug would appear to be that we sometimes only look at q->max_sectors
> when deciding on mergability.  Either we have to insist on max_sectors
> <= hw_max_sectors, or we have to start using min(q->max_sectors,
> q->max_hw_sectors) for this.

q->max_sectors MUST always be <= q->max_hw_sectors, otherwise we could
be sending down requests that are too large for the device to handle. So
that condition would be a big bug. The sysfs interface checks for this,
and blk_queue_max_sectors() makes sure that is true as well.

The fixes proposed still look weird. There is no phys vs hw segment
constraints, the request must adhere to the limits set by both. It's
mostly a moot point anyway, as 2.6.28 will get rid of the hw accounting
anyway.

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ