Re: [PATCH v4 10/10] scsi: scsi_debug: Validate the access parameters of WRITE ATOMIC (16)

[John Garry <john.garry@linux.dev>]

On 9/18/26 08:53, Niklas Cassel wrote:
>>> Call check_device_access_params(). The zone checks that it ends with are
>>> unreachable, as atomic writes and ZBC emulation are mutually exclusive.
>> These are quite verbose commit messages ... LLM-generated, by chance?
> Yes, hence the Assisted-by tag just a few lines further down:

I didn't know which part was :)

> 
>>> Assisted-by: LLM
>>> Fixes: 84f3a3c01d70 ("scsi: scsi_debug: Atomic write support")
>>> Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel<cassel@kernel.org>
> The commit message does point out two actual problems resulting from the
> missing check_device_access_params() call in resp_atomic_write() (which
> exists in all other resp_write_*() functions):
> 
> - Fails to repect the write protect module parameter, so resp_atomic_write()
>    fails to generate the proper sense data in this case.
> 
> - Fails to check if the command will write past that device capacity, so
>    resp_atomic_write() fails to generate the proper sense data in this case.
> 
> The generated sense data differs in the two cases.
> 
> I suppose we could drop:
> 
>    As a consequence a WRITE ATOMIC (16) past the end of the device is not
>    terminated with LOGICAL BLOCK ADDRESS OUT OF RANGE. do_device_access()
>    reduces the LBA modulo the size of the store, so the command writes
>    somewhere else on the medium instead. A WRITE ATOMIC (16) also writes to
>    a device whose wp module parameter is set, which every other write
>    refuses with DATA PROTECT.
> 
> 
>  From the commit message, as I suppose it might be a bit overly verbose to
> mention the exact sense data that each missing check would generate.
> If someone cares about that, they can just look at the mk_sense_buffer()
> calls in check_device_access_params().

I don't really care too much. I personally just find these LLM-generated 
commit messages laborious to read.