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 14:00:08 +0100
From:   Javier González <>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <>
Cc:     Sagi Grimberg <>,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] nvme: do not check for ns on rw path

> On 3 Nov 2017, at 13.53, Christoph Hellwig <> wrote:
>> -	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?

Looking at the history (i) the check has changed location and (ii) some
checks have been added through time. So it looks like leftovers from
here and there.

If we end up not needing these checks at all here, you can just fix it
all in the same commit. Just wanted to get rid of sparse/smatch

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists