linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi: libsas: Fix disk not being scanned in after being removed

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]

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