From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC v3] allow userspace to modify scsi command filter on per device basis Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 10:56:51 -0400 Message-ID: <48592233.6040408@redhat.com> References: <6cf6b73e0806152249r19cb405ct9d5a33960e619348@mail.gmail.com> <20080616151328Q.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> <6cf6b73e0806160222g19d7229dl6a650e13ab36c03b@mail.gmail.com> <20080618051447L.fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> <48583074.8010909@redhat.com> <48584252.5030901@interlog.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:52484 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750753AbYFRO5z (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jun 2008 10:57:55 -0400 In-Reply-To: <48584252.5030901@interlog.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: dgilbert@interlog.com Cc: FUJITA Tomonori , adel.gadllah@gmail.com, matthew@wil.cx, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, jens.axboe@oracle.com Douglas Gilbert wrote: > Peter Jones wrote: >> FUJITA Tomonori wrote: >> >>> Well, this changes sg behaviour since sg's allow_ops filter has a >>> access permission different from blk_verify_command filter's. >> > >>> I guess that the first thing you need to do is that figuring out a >>> proper access permission for each command, which sg maintainer, etc >>> can agree. It's pretty hard and that's the reason why this patch has >>> not been merged for years, I think. >> >> I don't think this logic is sound. > > That depends on your viewpoint. My viewpoint is this: 1) Whether you agree with his reasons or not, Linus made it pretty clear that he's against removing the command filter (see http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=115419945212450&w=2 ) 2) Having different code paths use different filtering code just adds more confusion. 3) If we're going to have filtering, it should be configurable on a per-device basis from userland. Which of these do you disagree with? [...] > Are per device command filters being proposed? Yes, that's what the patch implements. And it allows the userland to configure them according to the needs of the hardware. -- Peter