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: <CAGRGNgUA=LHbWqZY+hsYjfsTbyftc3uoGv6S3p8E4zPQyqsOGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 6 Feb 2020 23:41:55 +1100
From:   Julian Calaby <julian.calaby@...il.com>
To:     Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>
Cc:     Avi Shchislowski <Avi.Shchislowski@....com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        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

Hi Avri,

On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 11:08 PM Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Hi Avi,
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 9:48 PM Avi Shchislowski
> > <Avi.Shchislowski@....com> wrote:
> > >
> > > 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.
> >
> > That isn't my reading of this thread.
> >
> > You have two options:
> > 1. extend drivetemp if that makes sense for this particular application.
> > 2. follow the model of other devices that happen to have a built-in
> > temperature sensor and expose the hwmon compatible attributes as a
> > subdevice
> >
> > It appears that option 1 isn't viable, so what about option 2?
> This will require to export the ufs device management commands,
> Which is privet to the ufs driver.
>
> This is not a viable option as well, because it will allow unrestricted access
> (Including format etc.) to the storage device.
>
> Sorry for not making it clearer before.

I should have clarified further: I meant having the UFS device
register a HWMON driver using this API:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/hwmon/hwmon-kernel-api.html

*Not* writing a separate HWMON driver that uses some private interface.

Thanks,

-- 
Julian Calaby

Email: julian.calaby@...il.com
Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/