linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] libata: Sort Pioneer model in blacklist names lexicographically

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: <7ee6b490-baa7-44f5-733d-528755f37d81@opensource.wdc.com>
Date:   Thu, 8 Dec 2022 00:15:30 +0900
From:   Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>
To:     Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>
Cc:     Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@....com>, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libata: Sort Pioneer model in blacklist names
 lexicographically

On 12/7/22 22:26, Paul Menzel wrote:
> Dear Damien,
> 
> 
> Am 07.12.22 um 14:22 schrieb Damien Le Moal:
>> On 12/7/22 19:26, Paul Menzel wrote:
>>> Fixes: commit ea08aec7e77b ("libata: add ATA_HORKAGE_NOLPM for Pioneer BDR-207M and BDR-205")
>>> Cc: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@....com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/ata/libata-core.c | 2 +-
>>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
>>> index d3ce5c383f3a..c08c534b7fc7 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-core.c
>>> @@ -3990,8 +3990,8 @@ static const struct ata_blacklist_entry ata_device_blacklist [] = {
>>>   	{ "PIONEER DVD-RW  DVR-216D",	NULL,	ATA_HORKAGE_NOSETXFER },
>>>   
>>>   	/* These specific Pioneer models have LPM issues */
>>> -	{ "PIONEER BD-RW   BDR-207M",	NULL,	ATA_HORKAGE_NOLPM },
>>>   	{ "PIONEER BD-RW   BDR-205",	NULL,	ATA_HORKAGE_NOLPM },
>>> +	{ "PIONEER BD-RW   BDR-207M",	NULL,	ATA_HORKAGE_NOLPM },
>>
>> Nah... Not worse the trouble. If anything, I would rather have the entire
>> ata_device_blacklist array entries sorted alphabetically by vendor and models.
> 
> What trouble?

Manner of speaking. I meant the patch value is not worth the time to
process it.
As suggested, sorting the entire array would be a more valuable change.

> 
>>>   	/* Crucial BX100 SSD 500GB has broken LPM support */
>>>   	{ "CT500BX100SSD1",		NULL,	ATA_HORKAGE_NOLPM },
> 
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Paul

-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research