linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] selftests: ublk: kublk: use ioctl-encoded opcodes

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: <Z+MthdcV2jaSBnwC@dev-ushankar.dev.purestorage.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 16:26:13 -0600
From: Uday Shankar <ushankar@...estorage.com>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] selftests: ublk: kublk: use ioctl-encoded opcodes

On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 04:19:31PM -0600, Uday Shankar wrote:
> There are a couple of places in the kublk selftests ublk server which
> use the legacy ublk opcodes. These operations fail (with -EOPNOTSUPP) on
> a kernel compiled without CONFIG_BLKDEV_UBLK_LEGACY_OPCODES set. We
> could easily require it to be set as a prerequisite for these selftests,
> but since new applications should not be using the legacy opcodes, use
> the ioctl-encoded opcodes everywhere in kublk.

Is it required to allow for the building of old userspace code (using
legacy opcodes) against new kernel headers? Or do we only need to
guarantee that old userspace code using legacy opcodes that is already
compiled continues to work against newer ublk_drv? If it's the latter
case, maybe we can consider removing the legacy opcode definitions from
the userspace header as a follow-on change?