linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 0/5] scsi: ufs: ufs device as a temperature sensor

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: <MN2PR04MB6190D9E63717D37285DADBB09A1D0@MN2PR04MB6190.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Thu, 6 Feb 2020 10:40:03 +0000
From:   Avi Shchislowski <Avi.Shchislowski@....com>
To:     Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
CC:     Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/5] scsi: ufs: ufs device as a temperature sensor

As it become evident that the hwmon is not a viable option to implement ufs thermal notification, I would appreciate some concrete comments of this series.

Thanks,
Avi

> 
> > On Mon, Feb 03, 2020 at 09:29:57PM +0000, Avri Altman wrote:
> > > > >> Can you add an explanation why this can't be added to the just-
> > > > introduced
> > > > >> 'drivetemp' driver in the hwmon subsystem, and why it make
> > > > >> sense to
> > > > have
> > > > >> proprietary attributes for temperature and temperature limits ?
> > >
> > >
> > > Guenter hi,
> > > Yeah - I see your point. But here is the thing - UFS devices support
> > > only a subset of scsi commands.
> > > It does not support ATA_16 nor SMART attributes.
> > > Moreover, you can't read UFS attributes using any other
> > > scsi/ATA/SATA Commands, nor it obey the ATA temperature sensing
> conventions.
> > > So unless you want to totally break the newly born drivetemp -
> > > Better to leave ufs devices out of it.
> > >
> >
> > drivetemp is written with extensibility in mind. For example, Martin
> > has a prototype enhancement which supports SCSI drive temperature
> sensors.
> > As long as a device can be identified as ufs device, and as long as
> > there
> The ufs device does not identifies as such, e.g. by INQUIRY or other.
> 
> > is a means to pass-through commands, adding a new type would be easy.
> I am unaware of any such option.
> Device management commands are privet to the ufs driver.
> 
> Thanks,
> Avri