linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 12/13] block: make __register

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: <YYK8hY/giSBFN8YJ@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date:   Wed, 3 Nov 2021 09:44:53 -0700
From:   Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     axboe@...nel.dk, penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp,
        dan.j.williams@...el.com, vishal.l.verma@...el.com,
        dave.jiang@...el.com, ira.weiny@...el.com, richard@....at,
        miquel.raynal@...tlin.com, vigneshr@...com, efremov@...ux.com,
        song@...nel.org, martin.petersen@...cle.com, hare@...e.de,
        jack@...e.cz, ming.lei@...hat.com, tj@...nel.org,
        linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/13] block: make __register_blkdev() return an error

On Wed, Nov 03, 2021 at 05:09:33PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 03, 2021 at 05:21:56AM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > This makes __register_blkdev() return an error, and also changes the
> > probe() call to return an error as well.
> > 
> > We expand documentation for the probe call to ensure that if the block
> > device already exists we don't return on error on that condition. We do
> > this as otherwise we loose ability to handle concurrent requests if the
> > block device already existed.
> 
> I'm still not really sold on this - if the probe fails no bdev will
> be registered and the lookup will fail.  What is the benefit of
> propagating the exact error here?

Here's the thing, prober call a form of add_disk(), and so do we want
to always ignore the errors on probe? If so we should document why that
is sane then. I think this approach is a bit more sane though.

  Luis