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  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]
Date:   Fri, 3 Nov 2017 13:53:40 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Javier González <jg@...htnvm.io>
Cc:     hch@....de, sagi@...mberg.me, keith.busch@...el.com,
        linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Javier González <javier@...xlabs.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] nvme: do not check for ns on rw path

> -	if (ns && ns->ms &&
> +	if (ns->ms &&
>  	    (!ns->pi_type || ns->ms != sizeof(struct t10_pi_tuple)) &&
>  	    !blk_integrity_rq(req) && !blk_rq_is_passthrough(req))
>  		return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP;

blk_rq_is_passthrough also can't be true here.

How about:

	if (ns->ms && !blk_integrity_rq(req) &&
	    (!ns->pi_type || ns->ms != sizeof(struct t10_pi_tuple)))
		return BLK_STS_NOTSUPP;

Although I have to admit I don't really understand what this check
is even trying to do.  It basically checks for a namespace that has
a format with metadata that is not T10 protection information and
then rejects all I/O to it.  Why are we even creating a block device
node for such a thing?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists