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  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:   Thu, 30 Apr 2020 18:50:03 -0700
From:   Bart Van Assche <>
To:     Can Guo <>
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <>,
        open list <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] scsi: pm: Balance pm_only counter of request queue
 during system resume

On 2020-04-30 18:42, Can Guo wrote:
> On 2020-05-01 04:32, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > Has it been considered to test directly whether a SCSI device has been
> > runtime suspended instead of relying on blk_queue_pm_only()? How about
> > using pm_runtime_status_suspended() or adding a function in
> > block/blk-pm.h that checks whether q->rpm_status == RPM_SUSPENDED?
> Yes, I used to make the patch like that way, and it also worked well, as
> both ways are equal actually. I kinda like the current code because we
> should be confident that after scsi_dev_type_resume() returns, pm_only
> must be 0. Different reviewers may have different opinions, either way
> works well anyways.

Hi Can,

Please note that this is not a matter of personal preferences of a
reviewer but a matter of correctness. blk_queue_pm_only() does not only
return a value > 0 if a SCSI device has been runtime suspended but also
returns true if scsi_device_quiesce() was called for another reason.
Hence my request to test the "runtime suspended" status directly and not
to rely on blk_queue_pm_only().



Powered by blists - more mailing lists