From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tj@kernel.org,
FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
Doug Gilbert <dgilbert@interlog.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 part1 1/4] sg_io: pass request_queue to blk_verify_command
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 10:32:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <519F2597.9030208@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1369382613.1945.19.camel@dabdike>
Il 24/05/2013 10:03, James Bottomley ha scritto:
>>>>> > >>> Does anyone in the real world actually care about this bug?
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> Yes, or I would move on and not waste so much time on this.
>>> > >
>>> > > Fine, so produce a simple fix for this bug which we can discuss that's
>>> > > not tied to this feature.
>> >
>> > Honestly, I have no idea how this is even possible.
> Really? It looks to me like a simple block on the commands for disk
> devices in the opcode switch would do it (with a corresponding change to
> sg.c:sg_allow_access).
Which switch? What I can do is something like this in blk_verify_command:
if (q->sgio_type == TYPE_ROM)
return 0;
if (rq->cmd[0] == 0xA4)
return -EPERM;
if (!is_write &&
(req->cmd[0] == ... || rq->cmd[0] == ...))
return -EPERM;
But then the particular patch you're replying to is still necessary,
and you're slowing down blk_verify_command. It may be fine for stable
and -rc, but IMHO it calls for a better implementation in 3.11.
(Besides, I did it like this because it is what Tejun suggested).
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-24 8:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-23 13:58 [PATCH v3 part1 0/4] Fix SG_IO ambiguity between READ SUBCHANNEL and UNMAP (and other similar cases) Paolo Bonzini
2013-05-23 13:58 ` [PATCH v3 part1 1/4] sg_io: pass request_queue to blk_verify_command Paolo Bonzini
2013-05-24 7:36 ` James Bottomley
2013-05-24 7:43 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-05-24 7:50 ` James Bottomley
2013-05-24 7:53 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-05-24 8:03 ` James Bottomley
2013-05-24 8:32 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2013-05-24 21:41 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-05-25 4:14 ` James Bottomley
2013-05-25 6:18 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-05-23 13:58 ` [PATCH v3 part1 2/4] sg_io: prepare to introduce per-class command filters Paolo Bonzini
2013-05-23 13:58 ` [PATCH v3 part1 3/4] sg_io: use different default filters for each device class Paolo Bonzini
2013-05-23 13:58 ` [PATCH v3 part1 4/4] sg_io: resolve conflicts between commands assigned to multiple classes (CVE-2012-4542) Paolo Bonzini
2014-08-27 9:34 ` [PATCH v3 part1 0/4] Fix SG_IO ambiguity between READ SUBCHANNEL and UNMAP (and other similar cases) Luis Henriques
2014-08-27 10:09 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-08-27 12:08 ` Luis Henriques
2014-08-27 17:47 ` Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=519F2597.9030208@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=dgilbert@interlog.com \
--cc=fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.