linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] esp_scsi: Grant disconnect privilege for untagged commands

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: <4719e984-2c7e-33e1-6e7c-16dea5d4f610@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 15 Oct 2018 09:33:19 +1300
From:   Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@...il.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Finn Thain <fthain@...egraphics.com.au>
Cc:     "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] esp_scsi: Grant disconnect privilege for untagged
 commands

On 15/10/18 04:47, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

>> +	*p++ = IDENTIFY(lp && (tp->flags & ESP_TGT_DISCONNECT), lun);
> I think lp should always be non-NULL here.

That indeed appears to be the case these days.

So we can't rely on !lp to detect when probing the bus any longer. What 
else would be available? Do commands used for device probing also have a 
tag these days by default?

Do we really need to make that distinction?

Cheers,

     Michael