linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 1/5] mmc: Add erase, secure erase, trim and secure trim operations

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]

Date:	Thu, 01 Jul 2010 13:49:32 +0300
From:	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...ia.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	linux-kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kyungmin Park <kmpark@...radead.org>,
	Madhusudhan Chikkature <madhu.cr@...com>,
	linux-mmc Mailing List <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/5] mmc: Add erase, secure erase, trim and secure
 trim operations

Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 11:44:00 +0300
> Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...ia.com> wrote:
> 
>> SD/MMC cards tend to support an erase operation.  In addition,
>> eMMC v4.4 cards can support secure erase, trim and secure trim
>> operations that are all variants of the basic erase command.
> 
> The patch proposes a new userspace interface via sysfs, yes?
,
Just two read-only values

> 
> Please fully describe that interface and its operation in the
> changelog.  It'd also be nice to add permanent documentation for it.
> 

OK

>>>From reading the code, it appears that erase_size and
> preferred_erase_size have units in bytes.  But users shouldn't need to
> read the code to find that out.  What are the alignemnt and size
> requirements on these?  What is their position in /sys?  What do they
> actually *do* and what is the difference between them?
> 
> etetera.  People want to review this code and other people actually
> want to use it.  I'm not sure that I want to try to review this code
> when nobody's told me what interface it implements and how it's
> supposed to work.  Seems that whoever implemented BLKDISCARD didn't
> want anyone to use it either.  Sigh.
> 
> 
> All of mmc core appears to use 32-bit quantities to represent sectors,
> yes?  Why didn't it use sector_t?  What are the implications of this?

SD/MMC addressing uses 32-bit values.  There is a known 2TB limit for
SD/MMC cards.  As cards are only just getting to 64GB, that limit is
some way off, and it is not clear NAND technology can get there in
a SD/MMC package anyway.

I don't know why sector_t is not used.  I guess it would complicate doing
division since it can be 64-bit.

The implications are minimal.  In the unlikely event SD/MMC cards ever
exceed 2TB some changes will be needed, but the standard would have to
change to allow that first.


--
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/