Re: [patch] nfit: report frozen security state

[Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>]

Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> writes:

> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 2:55 PM Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> If a dimm is frozen, it is currently reported as being "locked".  While
>> that's not technically wrong, it is misleading as the dimm can't be
>> unlocked.  Fix the confusion.
>
> This looks ok, but now I wonder about the case where the DIMM is
> unlocked, but frozen?

Hah, forgot that was even a possibility.  :)

> I think it makes more sense to show "frozen" when the DIMM is
> frozen-locked, and show "unlocked" when frozen-unlocked. I.e. if the
> DIMM is frozen the user should assume it's disabled for general
> purpose operation, and if it's unlocked the fact that it will fail
> some security operations is a constrained error case. Thoughts?

I think that adds confusion.  I think we should print out both whether
or not it's locked and whether or not it's frozen.  Maybe:

unlocked, not frozen:  "unlocked"
locked, not frozen:    "locked"
unlocked, frozen:      "unlocked (frozen)"
locked, frozen:        "locked (frozen)"

Something like that?  I think nvdimm_security_state should be a bitmask,
not an enum.  That may be a part of the problem.

-Jeff

_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm