linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] UFS: Make TM command timeout configurable from host side

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: <1bf9f247-8cd7-400e-a5c8-6f3936927dfc@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 08:51:13 -0800
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: Peter Wang (王信友) <peter.wang@...iatek.com>,
 "beanhuo@...ron.com" <beanhuo@...ron.com>,
 "sh043.lee@...sung.com" <sh043.lee@...sung.com>,
 "avri.altman@....com" <avri.altman@....com>,
 "storage.sec@...sung.com" <storage.sec@...sung.com>,
 "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 "alim.akhtar@...sung.com" <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
 "adrian.hunter@...el.com" <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
 "martin.petersen@...cle.com" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] UFS: Make TM command timeout configurable from host side


On 11/11/25 6:58 PM, Peter Wang (王信友) wrote:
> Using a module parameter is a flexible method if the customer
> is using a device that may require an extended timeout value.

Introducing a new kernel module parameter for a timeout that depends on
the UFS device model doesn't sound ideal to me.

Can't we increase the default timeout (TM_CMD_TIMEOUT)? Increasing the 
default timeout shouldn't affect any configuration negatively, isn't it?

Thanks,

Bart.