On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 12:10:25 +0200 "Adel Gadllah" <adel.gadllah@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 2008/6/18 Peter Jones <pjones@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > Douglas Gilbert wrote: > >> > >> Peter Jones wrote: > >>> > >>> FUJITA Tomonori wrote: > >>> > >>>> Well, this changes sg behaviour since sg's allow_ops filter has a > >>>> access permission different from blk_verify_command filter's. > >>> > >>> > > >>>> > >>>> I guess that the first thing you need to do is that figuring out a > >>>> proper access permission for each command, which sg maintainer, etc > >>>> can agree. It's pretty hard and that's the reason why this patch has > >>>> not been merged for years, I think. > >>> > >>> I don't think this logic is sound. > >> > >> That depends on your viewpoint. > > > > My viewpoint is this: > > > > 1) Whether you agree with his reasons or not, Linus made it pretty clear > > that he's against removing the command filter (see > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=115419945212450&w=2 ) > > 2) Having different code paths use different filtering code just adds more > > confusion. > > 3) If we're going to have filtering, it should be configurable on a > > per-device basis from userland. > > > > Which of these do you disagree with? > > > > [...] > >> > >> Are per device command filters being proposed? > > > > Yes, that's what the patch implements. And it allows the userland to > > configure them according to the needs of the hardware. > > Jens can we add merge this for .27 or does anyone still has objections? I think that this patch makes sg's permission stricter. So this could break the existing user-space applications. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
