linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v2] scsi: ufs: critical health condition

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:
 <DM6PR04MB657573C4DE11B13E58B1B5ADFCF62@DM6PR04MB6575.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2025 17:47:46 +0000
From: Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>, "Martin K . Petersen"
	<martin.petersen@...cle.com>
CC: "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] scsi: ufs: critical health condition

> On 2/6/25 12:54 AM, Avri Altman wrote:
> > After some further internal discussions: The set conditions are vendor
> > specific; The device may set it as many times it wants depending on
> > its criticality. The spec does not define that nor what the host
> > should do. So there is this concern that some vendors will report
> > multiple times, while other wont. Hence, reading critical_health = 1
> > might be misleading. What do you think?
Still not sure if you want this to be a counter?

> 
> How about emitting a uevent if a critical health condition has been reported by a
> UFS device? See also sdev_evt_send().
Thanks for pointing this out.
A ufs event in enum scsi_device_event seems misplaced - looks like it was invented for unit attention codes.
How about calling kobject_uevent() or  kobject_uevent_env() directly from the driver?

Thanks,
Avri

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bart.