linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi: Delete scsi_{get,free}_host

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: <044a31ed-f6e9-3017-4973-3a02765933e0@suse.de>
Date:   Sat, 26 Jun 2021 13:55:15 +0200
From:   Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>
To:     John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>, martin.petersen@...cle.com,
        jejb@...ux.ibm.com
Cc:     bvanassche@....org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hch@....de, ming.lei@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: Delete scsi_{get,free}_host_dev()

On 6/25/21 6:58 PM, John Garry wrote:
> Functions scsi_{get,free}_host_dev() no longer have any in-tree users, so
> delete them.
> 
> Signed-off-by: John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
> ---
> An alt agenda of this patch is to get clarification on whether this API
> should be used for Hannes' reserved commands series.
> 
> Originally the recommendation was to use it, but now it seems to be to
> not use it:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-scsi/55918d68-7385-0153-0bd9-d822d3ce4c21@suse.de/
> 
Please don't.

Before we're doing something like this I would like to have 
clarification from Christoph which way he prefers for reserved commands. 
Personally I _do_ like the host dev approach for reserved commands as it 
allows us to re-use existing infrastructure.

Christoph?

Cheers,

Hannes
-- 
Dr. Hannes Reinecke                Kernel Storage Architect
hare@...e.de                              +49 911 74053 688
SUSE Software Solutions GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), Geschäftsführer: Felix Imendörffer