From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mauricio Faria de Oliveira Subject: Re: [dm-devel] IBM request to allow unprivledged ioctls [Was: Revert "dm mpath: fix stalls when handling invalid ioctls"] Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 12:47:06 -0200 Message-ID: <5632316A.5060909@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <1446121463-17828-1-git-send-email-mauricfo@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20151029131810.GA26841@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from e24smtp01.br.ibm.com ([32.104.18.85]:57195 "EHLO e24smtp01.br.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751017AbbJ2OrQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Oct 2015 10:47:16 -0400 Received: from /spool/local by e24smtp01.br.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 12:47:14 -0200 Received: from d24relay01.br.ibm.com (d24relay01.br.ibm.com [9.8.31.16]) by d24dlp02.br.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9175B1DC0060 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 10:46:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from d24av03.br.ibm.com (d24av03.br.ibm.com [9.8.31.95]) by d24relay01.br.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id t9TEldca4649142 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 12:47:39 -0200 Received: from d24av03.br.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d24av03.br.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id t9TEl9CR010629 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 2015 12:47:09 -0200 In-Reply-To: <20151029131810.GA26841@redhat.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: snitzer@redhat.com Cc: device-mapper development , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Hi Mike, On 10/29/2015 11:18 AM, Mike Snitzer wrote: > Sorry but I fail to see why your request to revert is viable. No problem. Thanks for moving this for a discussion on a proper fix. I'm somewhat new to kernel and SCSI workings and its community process, so that's certainly appreciated. > Wouldn't the correct fix be to train scsi_verify_blk_ioctl() to work > even without SYS_CAP_RAWIO? I see it would fix the problem as well, but I don't happen to know all of its usages, so I'd have to defer to question to someone who knows more of it. > I'm not doubting that the commit caused problems for the case you care > about (unprivledged users issueing ioctls) but that is an entirely > different issue that needs to be discussed more directly (with the > broader linux-scsi community, now cc'd). Sure. Thanks for opening the discussion. > p.s. leaving full context for linux-scsi so they don't need to track > down other mails (btw, thanks for the detailed patch header but it > enabled me to be skeptical of your request to revert): You're welcome. If it's been useful for rejecting this patch and getting a better one later, it's worth it. :) Kind regards, -- Mauricio Faria de Oliveira IBM Linux Technology Center