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

Date:   Wed, 7 Dec 2022 16:30:15 +0100
From:   Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>
To:     Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>
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

Dear Damien,


Am 07.12.22 um 16:15 schrieb Damien Le Moal:
> On 12/7/22 22:26, Paul Menzel wrote:

>> 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.

Understood. (I guess perfect is the enemy of the good – also as seen 
with my other patch from which other users can’t benefit.) :/

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


Kind regards,

Paul