linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH hyperv-next] scsi: storvsc: Don't call the packet status the hypercall status

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: <aba327ea-ee90-4868-b23e-c2a3ce2ede43@linux.microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 14:54:35 -0800
From: Roman Kisel <romank@...ux.microsoft.com>
To: Michael Kelley <mhklinux@...look.com>,
 "kys@...rosoft.com" <kys@...rosoft.com>,
 "haiyangz@...rosoft.com" <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
 "wei.liu@...nel.org" <wei.liu@...nel.org>,
 "decui@...rosoft.com" <decui@...rosoft.com>,
 "James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com"
 <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
 "martin.petersen@...cle.com" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
 "linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org>,
 "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: "apais@...rosoft.com" <apais@...rosoft.com>,
 "benhill@...rosoft.com" <benhill@...rosoft.com>,
 "sunilmut@...rosoft.com" <sunilmut@...rosoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH hyperv-next] scsi: storvsc: Don't call the packet status
 the hypercall status



On 2/28/2025 12:55 PM, Michael Kelley wrote:
> From: Roman Kisel <romank@...ux.microsoft.com> Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2025 3:31 PM
>>
>> The log statement reports the packet status code as the hypercall
>> status code which causes confusion when debugging.
>>
>> Fix the name of the datum being logged.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Roman Kisel <romank@...ux.microsoft.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c b/drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c
>> index a8614e54544e..d7ec79536d9a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/storvsc_drv.c
>> @@ -1183,7 +1183,7 @@ static void storvsc_on_io_completion(struct storvsc_device *stor_device,
>>   			STORVSC_LOGGING_WARN : STORVSC_LOGGING_ERROR;
>>
>>   		storvsc_log_ratelimited(device, loglevel,
>> -			"tag#%d cmd 0x%x status: scsi 0x%x srb 0x%x hv 0x%x\n",
>> +			"tag#%d cmd 0x%x status: scsi 0x%x srb 0x%x sts 0x%x\n",
>>   			scsi_cmd_to_rq(request->cmd)->tag,
>>   			stor_pkt->vm_srb.cdb[0],
>>   			vstor_packet->vm_srb.scsi_status,
> 
> FWIW, I added that last status value labelled "hv" in commit 08f76547f08d. And
> to confirm the discussion on the other thread, it's not a hypercall status -- it's a
> standard Windows NT status returned by the host-side VMBus or storvsp code.
> The "hv" is shorthand for Hyper-V, not hypercall. Perhaps that status is
> interpretable in a Windows guest, but it's not really interpretable in a Linux
> guest. The hex value would be useful only in the context of a support case
> where someone on the host side could be engaged to help with the
> interpretation.
> 
> I have no strong opinions on the label. Changing it from "hv" to "sts" or
> to "host" works for me.

Thank you, Michael, for helping us out with that! I'm leaning towards
"host" after Easwar's suggestion. As I understand from your reply,
it's fair to keep the tag as you're fine with the "host" option.

> 
> Reviewed-by: Michael Kelley <mhklinux@...look.com>

-- 
Thank you,
Roman