linux-scsi.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
To: "zhengbin (A)" <zhengbin13@huawei.com>,
	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Cc: bvanassche@acm.org, jejb@linux.ibm.com,
	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, yi.zhang@huawei.com,
	yanaijie@huawei.com, Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/13] scsi: core: fix uninit-value access of variable sshdr
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 15:06:06 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <75974004-7216-b035-123b-b1d88e6561e4@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b09013a1-648e-7cfc-9751-fc955161aba4@huawei.com>

On 10/21/19 3:49 AM, zhengbin (A) wrote:
> 
> On 2019/10/18 21:43, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
>> Hannes,
>>
>>> The one thing which I patently don't like is the ambivalence between
>>> DRIVER_SENSE and scsi_sense_valid().  What shall we do if only _one_
>>> of them is set?  IE what would be the correct way of action if
>>> DRIVER_SENSE is not set, but we have a valid sense code?  Or the other
>>> way around?
>> I agree, it's a mess.
>>
>> (Sorry, zhengbin, you opened a can of worms. This is some of our oldest
>> and most arcane code in SCSI)
>>
>>> But more important, from a quick glance not all drivers set the
>>> DRIVER_SENSE bit; so for things like hpsa or smartpqi the sense code is
>>> never evaluated after this patchset.
>> And yet we appear to have several code paths where sense evaluation is
>> contingent on DRIVER_SENSE. So no matter what, behavior might
>> change if we enforce consistent semantics. *sigh*
> 
> So what should we do to prevent unit-value access of sshdr?
> 
Where do you see it?
From my reading, __scsi_execute() is clearing sshdr by way of

__scsi_execute()
-> scsi_normalize_sense()
    -> memset(sshdr)

Cheers,

Hannes
-- 
Dr. Hannes Reinecke		      Teamlead Storage & Networking
hare@suse.de			                  +49 911 74053 688
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
HRB 247165 (AG München), GF: Felix Imendörffer

  reply	other threads:[~2019-10-21 13:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-18  8:24 [PATCH v5 00/13] scsi: core: fix uninit-value access of variable sshdr zhengbin
2019-10-18  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 01/13] scsi: core: need to check the result of scsi_execute in scsi_report_opcode zhengbin
2019-10-18  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 02/13] scsi: core: need to check the result of scsi_execute in scsi_test_unit_ready zhengbin
2019-10-18  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 03/13] scsi: core: need to check the result of scsi_execute in scsi_report_lun_scan zhengbin
2019-10-18  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 04/13] scsi: sr: need to check the result of scsi_execute in sr_get_events zhengbin
2019-10-18  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 05/13] scsi: sr: need to check the result of scsi_execute in sr_do_ioctl zhengbin
2019-10-18  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 06/13] scsi: scsi_dh_emc: need to check the result of scsi_execute in send_trespass_cmd zhengbin
2019-10-18  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 07/13] scsi: scsi_dh_rdac: need to check the result of scsi_execute in send_mode_select zhengbin
2019-10-18  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 08/13] scsi: scsi_dh_hp_sw: need to check the result of scsi_execute in hp_sw_tur,hp_sw_start_stop zhengbin
2019-10-21  9:08   ` kbuild test robot
2019-10-18  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 09/13] scsi: scsi_dh_alua: need to check the result of scsi_execute in alua_rtpg,alua_stpg zhengbin
2019-10-18  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 10/13] scsi: scsi_transport_spi: need to check whether sshdr is valid in spi_execute zhengbin
2019-10-18  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 11/13] scsi: cxlflash: need to check whether sshdr is valid in read_cap16 zhengbin
2019-10-18  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 12/13] scsi: ufs: need to check whether sshdr is valid in ufshcd_set_dev_pwr_mode zhengbin
2019-10-18  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 13/13] scsi: ch: need to check whether sshdr is valid in ch_do_scsi zhengbin
2019-10-18  9:41 ` [PATCH v5 00/13] scsi: core: fix uninit-value access of variable sshdr Hannes Reinecke
2019-10-18 13:43   ` Martin K. Petersen
2019-10-18 14:05     ` Hannes Reinecke
2019-10-18 23:17     ` [RFC] scsi: Avoid sign extension when setting command result bytes, was " Finn Thain
2019-10-21  1:49     ` zhengbin (A)
2019-10-21 13:06       ` Hannes Reinecke [this message]
2019-10-22  1:59         ` zhengbin (A)
2019-10-23  6:51           ` zhengbin (A)
2019-10-21  6:57     ` Johannes Thumshirn
2019-10-18 12:33 ` Damien Le Moal

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=75974004-7216-b035-123b-b1d88e6561e4@suse.de \
    --to=hare@suse.de \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=jthumshirn@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=yanaijie@huawei.com \
    --cc=yi.zhang@huawei.com \
    --cc=zhengbin13@huawei.com \
    /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).