From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D9E5C43334 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2022 18:55:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232196AbiGSSzy (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jul 2022 14:55:54 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50748 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230249AbiGSSzw (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jul 2022 14:55:52 -0400 Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 347E31152 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2022 11:55:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1658256951; x=1689792951; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=AuXqu/mjKwQiyQqUKl6rU9Nf93+qz77SwzOoMwtRF2Q=; b=cYElFrhogd4X8vjy2IxJ7zlxQh/5ZUk06dfw1XwEF/MPMwCq4eAYm2f2 7y8sTdWGDHVSMDkEk2xSiWMndSBe/+PEh29tNbbp/3TWk20EeUDd495GK 5CDythLlcpjwvWigN7ERt3xH089hWpBZDv5T2Mz4oU+nSrPc6/OaNOyde yBZ92MIOePWoTZYg2SsmCeBAkAr2Ow9hVrF8UFVlWRbnWbdZw66Pp0haV ZSZh8knDab9JC5ycmc2mi2kBfWM6zNvSz7EyBZVAj4hLyYhDRL4dAOdpq TTSrxElk4m0QhYHVKzGde6XRUYhg5EigCjXBqsA71zyI6GCrr5EPD7j5W w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6400,9594,10413"; a="350538875" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.92,285,1650956400"; d="scan'208";a="350538875" Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 19 Jul 2022 11:55:50 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.92,285,1650956400"; d="scan'208";a="724365948" Received: from djiang5-mobl1.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.213.175.55]) ([10.213.175.55]) by orsmga004-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 19 Jul 2022 11:55:50 -0700 Message-ID: <90b4cc78-9a27-b369-ea5e-c89d1d889fdb@intel.com> Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2022 11:55:49 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/91.0 Thunderbird/91.11.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 4/15] cxl/pmem: Add "Set Passphrase" security command support Content-Language: en-US To: Davidlohr Bueso Cc: linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, nvdimm@lists.linux.dev, dan.j.williams@intel.com, bwidawsk@kernel.org, ira.weiny@intel.com, vishal.l.verma@intel.com, alison.schofield@intel.com References: <165791918718.2491387.4203738301057301285.stgit@djiang5-desk3.ch.intel.com> <165791933557.2491387.2141316283759403219.stgit@djiang5-desk3.ch.intel.com> <20220718063652.osytkh3sji3mntfn@offworld> From: Dave Jiang In-Reply-To: <20220718063652.osytkh3sji3mntfn@offworld> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org On 7/17/2022 11:36 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > On Fri, 15 Jul 2022, Dave Jiang wrote: > >> However, the spec leaves a gap WRT master passphrase usages. The spec >> does >> not define any ways to retrieve the status of if the support of master >> passphrase is available for the device, nor does the commands that >> utilize >> master passphrase will return a specific error that indicates master >> passphrase is not supported. If using a device does not support master >> passphrase and a command is issued with a master passphrase, the error >> message returned by the device will be ambiguos. > > In general I think that the 2.0 spec is brief at *best* wrt to these > topics. > Even if a lot is redundant, there should be an explicit equivalent to the > theory of operation found in > https://pmem.io/documents/NVDIMM_DSM_Interface-V1.8.pdf I totally agree. > > Thanks, > Davidlohr