From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756154Ab3EVOa0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 May 2013 10:30:26 -0400 Received: from mail-pb0-f41.google.com ([209.85.160.41]:64166 "EHLO mail-pb0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750921Ab3EVOaY (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 May 2013 10:30:24 -0400 Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 23:30:19 +0900 From: Tejun Heo To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: "James E.J. Bottomley" , Jens Axboe , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: PING^7 (was Re: [PATCH v2 00/14] Corrections and customization of the SG_IO command whitelist (CVE-2012-4542)) Message-ID: <20130522143019.GA18541@mtj.dyndns.org> References: <1360163761-8541-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <519C674A.50700@redhat.com> <20130522093249.GC3466@mtj.dyndns.org> <519C959A.3090100@redhat.com> <20130522100212.GE3466@mtj.dyndns.org> <519C9CBC.3050003@redhat.com> <20130522134134.GA15189@mtj.dyndns.org> <519CD234.40608@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <519CD234.40608@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 04:12:04PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 22/05/2013 15:41, Tejun Heo ha scritto: > > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 12:23:56PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> Yes, because I have no idea what _your_ point is. > > > > Isolate the actual fixes and just submit them as it seems impossible > > for you to provide proper justifications for the things you want to > > add. > > Quoting myself on January 26, 2013: "The vast majority of the commands > are added because Linux itself is using them". See, this is exactly what I've been talking about. Reviewing or raising points is almost useless. Gees, why did I start this again? Why the hell aren't my points clear yet after so many exchanges on the exact same frigging subject? Stop repeting yourself and try to understand the review points for once. * Separate fixes from additions. Transform existing code so that the visible behavior doesn't change but the required fix can be implemented on top. Explicitly note what's going on in the commit messages. * Fix the frigging CVE bug that you've been waving around and do *just* that. * Add the frigging "count me out" feature that you want for your use case. It isn't controversial and is what you need and the maintainer can apply to the point where [s]he thinks acceptable. * If for whatever reason you have to add more command codes to the exception table, do them with explicit justifications. How the hell "the vast majority of the commands are added because Linux itself is using them" a proper justification? How are they used for what reason and why is adding them beneficial? How many times have I asked you to give at least some useful use cases? And WTF is "vast majority", what about others then? Why do you need this at all if you have the "count me out" knob in the first place? You first built that command list by scanning the spec and just adding the commands that seemed "right" to you. I have near-zero confidence in your perception of the relationship between the specs and actual world. So, stop quoting and repeating yourself. You're overdoing yourself on that department already. Try to listen and understand for a change. -- tejun