linux-kernel - Re: [resend v1 5/5] drivers/scsi/sd.c: Convert to use disk_set

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:   Wed, 8 Jan 2020 04:20:47 +0000
From:   "Singh, Balbir" <sblbir@...zon.com>
To:     "martin.petersen@...cle.com" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Sangaraju, Someswarudu" <ssomesh@...zon.com>,
        "jejb@...ux.ibm.com" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "hch@....de" <hch@....de>, "axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        "mst@...hat.com" <mst@...hat.com>,
        "linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "Chaitanya.Kulkarni@....com" <Chaitanya.Kulkarni@....com>
Subject: Re: [resend v1 5/5] drivers/scsi/sd.c: Convert to use
 disk_set_capacity

On Tue, 2020-01-07 at 22:15 -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> Balbir,
> 
> > > We already emit an SDEV_EVT_CAPACITY_CHANGE_REPORTED event if device
> > > capacity changes. However, this event does not automatically cause
> > > revalidation.
> > 
> > The proposed idea is to not reinforce revalidation, unless explictly
> > specified (in the thread before Bob Liu had suggestions). The goal is
> > to notify user space of changes via RESIZE. SCSI sd can opt out of
> > this IOW, I can remove this if you feel
> > SDEV_EVT_CAPACITY_CHANGE_REPORTED is sufficient for current use cases.
> 
> I have no particular objection to the code change. I was just observing
> that in the context of sd.c, RESIZE=1 is more of a "your request to
> resize was successful" notification due to the requirement of an
> explicit userland action in case a device reports a capacity change.
> 

That is true, yes I agree with your observation.

Balbir Singh.