linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] partitions/ide: improve Host Protected Area handling

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: <20090601140651.5261ecbb@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date:	Mon, 1 Jun 2009 14:06:51 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Greg Freemyer <greg.freemyer@...il.com>
Cc:	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>,
	linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
	"Andries E. Brouwer" <Andries.Brouwer@....nl>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Robert Hancock <hancockrwd@...il.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] partitions/ide: improve Host Protected Area
 handling

On Mon, 1 Jun 2009 08:59:29 -0400
Greg Freemyer <greg.freemyer@...il.com> wrote:

> Alan, given your emphatic ack, is libata likely to follow the same
> model.  Any chance we could have a single boot param that handled both

If the patches get in then it makes no sense not to implement them
identically in libata.

> drivers?  I mean instead of having 2 module params.

No because the modules have different names so it will always be
ide_core.something and libata.something

Bartlomiej - thinking about this I question "nohpa=" because we get into
unneccessary negatives ide_core.hpa= is one less inversion to figure out.
--
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/