linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/2] UFS Advanced RPMB

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

Date:   Thu, 10 Nov 2022 14:50:47 +0100
From:   Bean Huo <beanhuo@...pp.de>
To:     Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>,
        "alim.akhtar@...sung.com" <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
        "jejb@...ux.ibm.com" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "martin.petersen@...cle.com" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        "stanley.chu@...iatek.com" <stanley.chu@...iatek.com>,
        "beanhuo@...ron.com" <beanhuo@...ron.com>,
        "bvanassche@....org" <bvanassche@....org>,
        "tomas.winkler@...el.com" <tomas.winkler@...el.com>,
        "daejun7.park@...sung.com" <daejun7.park@...sung.com>,
        "quic_cang@...cinc.com" <quic_cang@...cinc.com>,
        "quic_nguyenb@...cinc.com" <quic_nguyenb@...cinc.com>,
        "quic_xiaosenh@...cinc.com" <quic_xiaosenh@...cinc.com>,
        "quic_richardp@...cinc.com" <quic_richardp@...cinc.com>,
        "quic_asutoshd@...cinc.com" <quic_asutoshd@...cinc.com>,
        "hare@...e.de" <hare@...e.de>
Cc:     "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/2] UFS Advanced RPMB


Avri, 

Thanks for your suggetions and review

On Wed, 2022-11-09 at 08:18 +0000, Avri Altman wrote:
> > In UFS 4.0, it introduced advanced RPMB, which can significantly
> > improve
> > RPMB's command performance, enhancing its atomic operation. We
> > don't
> > know which implementation will please everyone, mark this advanced
> > RPMB
> > patch as RFC. Any suggestions to make the patch a master patch are
> > welcome.
> > Based on suggestions and feedback from Hannes Reinecke and Bart, we
> > can
> > use job_bsg->request and job_bsg->reply to pass EHS packets without
> > changing
> > the BSG V4 structure and BSG core. So we push RFC patch just to
> > start
> > Advanced RPMB mainlining
> 
> I concur with this approach.
> 
> The current limitations that the new spec imposes,
> 
> e.g. putting confidential data in a construct that lives in the ufs-
> driver,
> 
> practically gives no other alternative but ufs-bsg.
> 
> 
> 
> If no one else object, maybe you can leave out the rfc from the next
> version.
> 
> 

I will prepare next version, and address your all questions in the next
version. thanks.

Kind regards,
Bean