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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e95993da-db88-5db2-0aa8-f0c7589ce902@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 17:42:41 +0800
From: yangxingui <yangxingui@...wei.com>
To: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>, Jason Yan <yanaijie@...wei.com>,
	<jejb@...ux.ibm.com>, <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
	<damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>
CC: <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linuxarm@...wei.com>, <prime.zeng@...ilicon.com>,
	<chenxiang66@...ilicon.com>, <kangfenglong@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: libsas: Fix disk not being scanned in after being
 removed

Hi John,

On 2024/2/27 17:06, John Garry wrote:
> On 27/02/2024 07:16, Jason Yan wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Can we directly set phy->negotiated_linkrate = SAS_PHY_DISABLED 
>>>> here? For an empty PHY the other variables means nothing, so why 
>>>> bother get and update them?
>>> The value of the negotiated link rate has two possible values ​​in 
>>> the current processing branch: SAS_LINK_RATE_UNKNOWN and 
>>> SAS_PHY_DISABLED, and both come from disc_resp. If we do not use 
>>> disc_resp, but set a fixed value SAS_PHY_DISABLED for it, it may not 
>>> be appropriate.
> 
> But we know that the phy is disabled, right? It's our phy, isn't it?
Yes, just like the previous submission, if we disable phy ourselves 
through the sysfs node, we can configure the negotiation rate to 
SAS_PHY_DISABLED by setting phy->phy->enable to 0. It might be better to 
use sas_set_ex_phy() as you described before, it will refresh other phy 
information synchronously, such as sas_address, device_type, 
target_protocols, etc. If we only update the negotiation rate and 
maintain the old information, is it because it is special? Is it better 
to update phy information uniformly?

Thanks,
Xingui

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ