On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 11:09:51AM +0900, Minwoo Im wrote: > > I was still allowed to write to NSID2: > > > > sudo nvme zns report-zones -d 1 /dev/nvme0n2 > > SLBA: 0x0 WP: 0x1 Cap: 0x3e000 State: IMP_OPENED Type: SEQWRITE_REQ Attrs: 0x0 > > > > Should this really be allowed? > > I think this should not be allowed at all. Thanks for the testing! It should not be allowed, but it seems like a pre-existing problem as nvme_user_cmd does not verify the nsid. > > I was under the impression that Christoph's argument for implementing per > > namespace char devices, was that you should be able to do access control. > > Doesn't that mean that for the new char devices, we need to reject ioctls > > that specify a nvme_passthru_cmd.nsid != the NSID that the char device > > represents? > > > > > > Although, this is not really something new, as we already have the same > > behavior when it comes ioctls and the block devices. Perhaps we want to > > add the same verification there? > > I think there should be verifications. Yes. > > Regardless if we want to add a verification for block devices or not, > > it just seemed to me that the whole argument for introducing new char > > devices was to allow access control per namespace, which doesn't seem > > to have been taken into account, but perhaps I'm missing something. > > Any other points that you think it's not been taken account? I think it > should map to previous blkdev operations, but with some verfications > there. It would be great if you can share any other points supposed to > be supported here :) Agreed.
