linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi: make scsi_devinfo infrastructure optional

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: <1297350456.4933.25.camel@mulgrave.site>
Date:	Thu, 10 Feb 2011 09:07:36 -0600
From:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>
To:	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: make scsi_devinfo infrastructure optional

On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 10:18 +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 7:00 PM, James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-02-09 at 15:15 +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> >> Add SCSI_QUIRKS config option (default y and dependent on EMBEDDED
> >> config option) to allow disabling of scsi_devinfo infrastructure.
> >>
> >> The output code size savings are ~14k for CONFIG_SCSI_QUIRKS=n
> >> (as measured on x86-32):
> >
> > I don't understand the point of this patch ... without the quirks SCSI
> > will do the wrong thing on a whole bunch of stuff.  The savings look to
> > be tiny ... since the SCSI module is habitually a lot larger than your
> > figures suggest.
> 
> The patch was originally done for embedded ATA-only setups.

Well, if it's for ATA only then the better course would be extracting
libata from scsi.  It's also a bit misleading to do sizings on x86,
because that doesn't imply embedded to me.  Aren't there still ATAPI
devices that require the quirks?

Most embedded setups include some form of USB ... again, the pluggable
CD/DVD use the quirks table.

Given the potential for disaster even on embedded systems, I don't
really think something like this is a good idea.

James


--
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/