linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the driver-core tree with the jc

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 8 Oct 2022 13:33:26 +0200
From:   Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:     наб <nabijaczleweli@...ijaczleweli.xyz>,
        Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Spraul Manfred (XC-CT/PAC1)" <manfred.spraul@...bosch.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the driver-core tree with the jc_docs
 tree

Hi,

On Dienstag, 27. September 2022 21:25 , Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> 
wrote:
> Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> writes:
>
>> On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 04:54:45PM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>>> наб <nabijaczleweli@...ijaczleweli.xyz> writes:
>>>> This also reveals that I missed NBD_REQUEST_MAGIC (needs to go,
>>>> same reason as NBD_REPLY_MAGIC) in the first pass, but that's
>>>> unrelated here.
>>> I've been trying to make sense of that merge myself.  Is the right
>>> solution that I should just drop 32ba63d4b2e1a ?  Manfred, thoughts
>>> on that?
>> That'd certainly be a viable option too.
> OK, I have dropped the conflicting patch.  Manfred, if there are changes there that still need to get in, please resubmit that part and we'll get it done.

Dropping is the correct approach:
The values are part of the line protocol, and thus according to the 
current definition not in scope.

In theory, the change in include/uapi/linux/nbd.h is still useful, but I 
do not think that this is worth the effort.
>
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/nbd.h b/include/uapi/linux/nbd.h
> index 20d6cc91435d..88752b20e6c8 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/nbd.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/nbd.h
> @@ -11,6 +11,8 @@
>  *            Cleanup PARANOIA usage & code.
>  * 2004/02/19 Paul Clements
>  *            Removed PARANOIA, plus various cleanup and comments
> + *
> + * See doc/proto.md of the nbd package for more details on the protocol.
>  */
>
> #ifndef _UAPILINUX_NBD_H
> @@ -63,7 +65,6 @@ enum {
>
> #define NBD_REQUEST_MAGIC 0x25609513
> #define NBD_REPLY_MAGIC 0x67446698
> -/* Do *not* use magics: 0x12560953 0x96744668. */
>
> /*
>  * This is the packet used for communication between client and
> --
>

--

     Manfred