linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 8/8] libata: implement on-demand HPA unlocking

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: <20100516.001903.67915868.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Sun, 16 May 2010 00:19:03 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	tj@...nel.org
Cc:	jeff@...zik.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, jens.axboe@...cle.com,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, James.Bottomley@...e.de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ben@...adent.org.uk,
	bzolnier@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] libata: implement on-demand HPA unlocking

From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Date: Sat, 15 May 2010 20:09:34 +0200

> Implement ata_scsi_unlock_native_capacity() which will be called
> through SCSI layer when block layer notices that partitions on a
> device extend beyond the end of the device.  It requests EH to unlock
> HPA, waits for completion and returns the current device capacity.
> 
> This allows libata to unlock HPA on demand instead of having to decide
> whether to unlock upfront.  Unlocking on demand is safer than
> unlocking by upfront because some BIOSes write private data to the
> area beyond HPA limit.  This was suggested by Ben Hutchings.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> Suggested-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>

Acked-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
--
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/