linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] scsi: fnic: Stop setting scsi

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:   Mon, 16 Aug 2021 11:00:29 +0100
From:   John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
To:     Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        "Bart Van Assche" <bvanassche@....org>
CC:     <satishkh@...co.com>, <sebaddel@...co.com>, <kartilak@...co.com>,
        <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>, <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] scsi: fnic: Stop setting scsi_cmnd.tag

On 14/08/2021 13:35, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> On 8/14/21 9:39 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 08:17:45PM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>>> On 8/13/21 6:49 AM, John Garry wrote:
>>>> It is never read. Setting it and the request tag seems dodgy
>>>> anyway.
>>>
>>> This is done because there is code in the SCSI error handler that may
>>> allocate a SCSI command without allocating a tag. See also
>>> scsi_ioctl_reset().

Right, so we just get a loan of the tag of a real request. fnic driver 
comment:

"Really should fix the midlayer to pass in a proper request for ioctls..."

>>
>> Yes.  Hannes had a great series to stop passing the pointless scsi_cmnd
>> to the reset methods.  Hannes, any chance you coul look into
>> resurrecting that?
>>
> Sure.

The latest iteration of that series - at v7 - still passed that fake 
SCSI command to the reset method, and the reset method allocated the 
internal command.

So will we change change scsi_ioctl_reset() to allocate an internal 
command, rather than the LLDD?

Thanks,
John