linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC v2 03/18] scsi: core: Implement reserved command handling

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:   Tue, 14 Jun 2022 11:20:32 -0700
From:   Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To:     Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>,
        John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>, axboe@...nel.dk,
        jejb@...ux.ibm.com, martin.petersen@...cle.com, brking@...ibm.com,
        hare@...e.de, hch@....de
Cc:     linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        chenxiang66@...ilicon.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 03/18] scsi: core: Implement reserved command
 handling

On 6/13/22 00:01, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 6/9/22 19:29, John Garry wrote:
>> +	/*
>> +	 * This determines how many commands the HBA will set aside
>> +	 * for internal commands. This number will be added to
>> +	 * @can_queue to calcumate the maximum number of simultaneous
> 
> s/calcumate/calculate
> 
> But this is weird. For SATA, can_queue is 32. Having reserved commands,
> that number needs to stay the same. We cannot have more than 32 tags.
> I think keeping can_queue as the max queue depth with at most
> nr_reserved_cmds tags reserved is better.
> 
>> +	 * commands sent to the host.
>> +	 */
>> +	int nr_reserved_cmds;

+1 for Damien's request. I also prefer to keep can_queue as the maximum
queue depth, whether or not nr_reserved_cmds has been set.

Thanks,

Bart.