linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] nvme: create 'paths' entries for hidden controllers

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20181108091628.GA4217@lst.de>
Date:   Thu, 8 Nov 2018 10:16:28 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo <cascardo@...onical.com>
Cc:     linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Potnuri Bharat Teja <bharat@...lsio.com>,
        Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.com>,
        "Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] nvme: create 'paths' entries for hidden controllers

On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 08:29:55PM -0300, Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo wrote:
> When using initramfs-tools with only the necessary dependencies to mount
> the root filesystem, it will fail to include nvme drivers for a root on a
> multipath nvme. That happens because the slaves relationship is not
> present.
> 
> As discussed in [1], using slaves will break lsblk, because the slaves are
> hidden from userspace, that is, they have no real block device, just an
> entry under sysfs.

I wonder if the better way would be to unhide the slaves, but always
have a claim on them, so that others can't really use them?  While the
hiding idea seamed very neat it seems to cause a fair amount of problems
after all.