linux-kernel - Re: UFS utilities

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:   Tue, 5 Dec 2017 22:22:09 +0000
From:   Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@....com>
To:     "beanhuo@...ron.com" <beanhuo@...ron.com>,
        "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "vinholikatti@...il.com" <vinholikatti@...il.com>
Subject: Re: UFS utilities

On Mon, 2017-12-04 at 15:20 +0000, Bean Huo (beanhuo) wrote:
> Also, is it possible bypass SCSI stacks and go into directly UFS stack?

Hello Bean,

Sorry but I think it would be wrong to bypass the block layer when submitting
UFS commands. My understanding is that UFS devices are used in systems where
power management functionality is important (see also Documentation/power).
If the block layer would be bypassed then the power management support that
exists in the block layer will have to be reimplemented in UFS devices. That
would be a duplicate effort. I'm not sure that we want such duplication.

Bart.