From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
stable@vger.kernel.org, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] block: avoid false positive warnings on ioctl to partition
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 09:13:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F4DDE14.8050406@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFyoTxFcHZXa=XfxrK1JB0cksHxQPsRUiJnhAFeE=-hynw@mail.gmail.com>
Il 29/02/2012 01:14, Linus Torvalds ha scritto:
> So I'm still not convinced this is safe, and feel a bit worried about
> us possibly silently missing some things. That
>
> default:
> return -ENOIOCTLCMD;
>
> is what worries me.
>
> Blocking the ones we *know* about and understand I'm perfectly fine
> with. And the SG_IO case looks fine. It's the possibly unknown users
> that still worry me.
I understand.
We do have a good grasp of what's happening. We did get reports for
SG_IO, for false positives that would have returned -ENOTTY, and for
ioctls that need to be passed. We couldn't expect anything better than
this, I think.
I checked in the source and all scsi_host-specific ioctls need
filtering. Of course we might be missing something really obscure which
is rarely used in the wild. But being 100% sure that nothing breaks is
impossible, unfortunately, so does it make sense to aim at 100%? And it
should be extremely easy to bisect failures. Even with all the
differences, it reminds me of the recent change to poll.
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-29 8:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-17 7:38 [PATCH v2] block: avoid false positive warnings on ioctl to partition Paolo Bonzini
2012-02-27 12:36 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-02-29 0:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-02-29 8:13 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2012-02-29 19:56 ` Ray Lee
2012-02-29 21:26 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-03-06 11:35 ` Paolo Bonzini
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=4F4DDE14.8050406@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).