linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] nvme: Allow reauth from sysfs

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: <f40b441b-2a82-4739-a4c2-a47b2376a80f@nvidia.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2025 02:32:05 +0000
From: Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@...dia.com>
To: Alistair Francis <alistair23@...il.com>
CC: "kbusch@...nel.org" <kbusch@...nel.org>, "axboe@...nel.dk"
	<axboe@...nel.dk>, "sagi@...mberg.me" <sagi@...mberg.me>, "hare@...e.de"
	<hare@...e.de>, "linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org"
	<linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@....com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] nvme: Allow reauth from sysfs

On 11/2/25 6:24 PM, Alistair Francis wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 12:05 PM Chaitanya Kulkarni
> <chaitanyak@...dia.com> wrote:
>> On 11/2/25 5:47 PM, Alistair Francis wrote:
>>> On Sat, Nov 1, 2025 at 12:05 AM Christoph Hellwig<hch@....de> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 01:51:14PM +1000,alistair23@...il.com wrote:
>>>>> From: Alistair Francis<alistair.francis@....com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Allow userspace to trigger a reauth (REPLACETLSPSK) from sysfs.
>>>>> This can be done by writing the queue ID to te sysfs file.
>>>>>
>>>>> echo 0 > /sys/devices/virtual/nvme-fabrics/ctl/nvme0/replace_psk
>>>>>
>>>>> Note that only QID 0 (admin queue) is supported.
>>>> Why pass the queue ID then instead of a boolean value?
>>> I liked the explicitness of passing a queue ID instead of a bool and
>>> it allows supporting more queues in the future if that changes in the
>>> spec.
>>>
>>> I can change it to a bool instead if that's preferred?
>>>
>>> Alistair
>> do you have any plans to add support for the I/O queues in future ?
> No, it would require a spec change


okay so it's going to be significant change of functionality via spec.


>> OR
>> have a strong usecase for I/O queues to support this feature ?
> I do not, but it does seem like something that maybe should be supported


it does sound useful and it's a spac change so how about we add separate 
I/O queues interface with spec change and keep this purely admin queue ?

> Alistair
>
>> -ck
>>