[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120126000749.GC14281@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 16:07:49 -0800
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...il.com>
Cc: Sven-Haegar Koch <haegar@...net.de>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
James Bottomley <JBottomley@...allels.com>
Subject: Re: [v2] Re: [091/129] block: fail SCSI passthrough ioctls on
partition devices
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 06:10:47PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 5:51 PM, Sven-Haegar Koch <haegar@...net.de> wrote:
> > On Wed, 25 Jan 2012, Greg KH wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 05:43:50PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> > > You need to return -ENOTTY from scsi_verify_blk_ioctl and -ENOIOCTLCMD from
> >> > > sd_compat_ioctl, because -ENOIOCTLCMD will not be handled correctly by
> >> > > block/ioctl.c. This would break BLKROSET and BLKFLSBUF done by non-root
> >> > > but with the appropriate capabilities.
> >> > >
> >> > > Fixed patch follows. If you prefer that I send an interdiff, let me know.
> >>
> >> Wait, why do you want the stable trees to diverge from what is in
> >> Linus's tree with regards to the error codes being returned?
> >>
> >> That doesn't seem safe, or sane.
> >>
> >> So for now, I'm going to follow what is in Linus's tree. If you
> >> need/want the error codes to be different, then shouldn't it also be
> >> done there as well?
> >
> > May be because the stable trees do not have
> > 07d106d0a33d6063d2061305903deb02489eba20? "vfs: fix up ENOIOCTLCMD error
> > handling"?
>
> I believe that is the case, yes. Linus was unhappy about ENOIOCTLCMD vs.
> ENOTTY overall when the patch was first submitted, which lead to that commit.
> The patches Paolo submitted for stable are the original versions that apply
> directly to 3.2 and older.
>
> 07d106d0a isn't really stable material as it was put into 3.3 to catch any odd
> fallout from the change.
Ok, thanks both of you, that makes more sense now. I'll take Paolo's
updated patches and do a release now.
greg k-h
--
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