On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 08:10:03AM +0200, hch@xxxxxx wrote: > On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 08:19:47PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > On Thu, 2017-05-25 at 14:48 -0400, J . Bruce Fields wrote: > > > On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 11:43:14AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > > > Since using scsi_req() is only allowed against request queues for > > > > which struct scsi_request is the first member of their private > > > > request data, refuse to submit SCSI commands against a queue for > > > > which this is not the case. > > > > > > Is it possible we could catch this earlier and avoid giving out the > > > layout in the first place? > > > > Hello Christoph, > > > > According to what I see in commit 8650b8a05850 you are the author of this > > code? Can the blk_queue_scsi_pdu(q) test fail in nfsd4_scsi_identify_device()? > > If the user explicitly asked for a scsi layout export of a non-scsi > device it can. > > > If so, can nfsd4_layout_verify() be modified in such a way that it prevents > > that nfsd4_scsi_proc_getdeviceinfo() is ever called for a non-SCSI queue? > > Can you recommend an approach? > > Not easily. The only thing we could do is an export time check, that > would refuse the scsi layout export if the device is not capable. > > I can look into that, but it will take some time so for now I think we > should go ahead with your series. Fine by me.--b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
