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]

Date:   Mon, 15 Oct 2018 10:13:37 +1100 (AEDT)
From:   Finn Thain <fthain@...egraphics.com.au>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
cc:     "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@...il.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 Sun, 14 Oct 2018, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

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

It's not clear from Documentation/scsi/scsi_mid_low_api.txt, but I guess 
that's true for scanning of targets.

Is it true in general that queuecommand for a device will not occur before 
its slave_alloc and not after its slave_destroy invocation?

(I'm thinking of queuecommand via the other command submission paths, like 
ioctl.)

--