linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/16] scsi: libsas and users: Factor out LLDD TMF code

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: <1114e27f-e6b3-e9b9-a892-f543f4636c4e@huawei.com>
Date:   Mon, 7 Feb 2022 13:09:43 +0000
From:   John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
To:     Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>,
        <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>, <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        <artur.paszkiewicz@...el.com>, <jinpu.wang@...ud.ionos.com>,
        <chenxiang66@...ilicon.com>, <Ajish.Koshy@...rochip.com>
CC:     <yanaijie@...wei.com>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linuxarm@...wei.com>, <liuqi115@...wei.com>,
        <Viswas.G@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/16] scsi: libsas and users: Factor out LLDD TMF code

Hi Damien,

On 04/02/2022 03:02, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> This is the submission path, not completion. The code is:
> 
> (gdb) list *(pm8001_queue_command+0x842)
> 0x3d42 is in pm8001_queue_command (drivers/scsi/pm8001/pm8001_sas.c:491).
> 486				atomic_dec(&pm8001_dev->running_req);
> 487				goto err_out_tag;
> 488			}
> 489			/* TODO: select normal or high priority */
> 490			spin_lock(&t->task_state_lock);
> 491			t->task_state_flags |= SAS_TASK_AT_INITIATOR;
> 492			spin_unlock(&t->task_state_lock);
> 493		} while (0);
> 494		rc = 0;
> 495		goto out_done;
> 
> So the task is already completed when the submission path tries to set
> the state flag ? Debugging...

JFYI, I am putting together a patch to drop SAS_TASK_AT_INITIATOR 
altogether. I just need to ensure that the logic in the isci code is 
correct.

Thanks,
John