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: <ac48d955-8169-467d-962c-e7f55854ba06@grimberg.me>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 23:26:00 +0300
From: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>
To: Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.de>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>, James Smart <james.smart@...adcom.com>,
 Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/6] nvme: authentication error are always
 non-retryable



On 09/04/2024 12:35, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>
>
> Any authentication errors which are generated internally are always
> non-retryable, so use negative error codes to ensure they are not
> retried.

The patch title says that any authentication error is not retryable, and
the patch body says "authentication errors which are generated locally
are non-retryable" so which one is it?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ