On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Matthew Dharm wrote:
We both agree that the code shouldn't run off the end of the s-g list.
Incidentally, if people want a simple bugfix patch for 2.6.24.stable,
this should do it. Mark, can you confirm that this patch alone fixes
the problem?
Alan Stern
Index:
On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 11:46:13 -0500 (EST)
Alan Stern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Matthew Dharm wrote:
We both agree that the code shouldn't run off the end of the s-g
list.
Incidentally, if people want a simple bugfix patch for 2.6.24.stable,
this should do it. Mark,
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
Did you mean scsi_kmap_atomic_sg()?
Yes .. I replied from memory rather than looking in the source.
That appears to do only part of
what usb_stor_access_xfer_buf() does. In fact, all it does is map a
single page.
Um, it does everything
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Matthew Dharm wrote:
Six of one and a half-dozen of the other. All we're arguing over is the
definition of correct behavior here. You want to change the API so that
overrun is acceptable and handled; I prefer calling it a Bad Thing(tm).
We both agree that the code
On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 17:18 -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Matthew Dharm wrote:
Maybe this is a crazy question, but...
Why is this not in the SCSI core?
Or even in the block core?
It's hardly USB-specific, and I'm
willing to bet that there are other HCDs (at
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
What we're talking about is a routine that provides drivers a simple
way to access the data in a scatter-gather buffer (which may lie in
highmem or otherwise not be easily reachable). The idea is that some
commands are emulated by the driver
On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 18:25 -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
What we're talking about is a routine that provides drivers a simple
way to access the data in a scatter-gather buffer (which may lie in
highmem or otherwise not be easily reachable). The
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
However the interface to usb_stor_access_xfer_buf() will have to change
slightly. Right now if it sees that *sgptr is NULL, it assumes this
means it should start at the beginning of the s-g buffer. But with
Boaz's change, *sgptr == NULL means the
On Tue, Feb 05 2008 at 17:42 +0200, Alan Stern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
However the interface to usb_stor_access_xfer_buf() will have to change
slightly. Right now if it sees that *sgptr is NULL, it assumes this
means it should start at the beginning
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 03:05:58PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Matthew Dharm wrote:
I think the correct approach is to modify those routines so that they
will never overrun the s-g buffer (like Boaz has done), and _document_
this behavior. Then the callers can feel free
On Thu, Jan 31 2008 at 22:56 +0200, Alan Stern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
The code in usb_stor_access_xfer_buf() will
now correctly attempt to transfer according to buflen and what ever is
available
at the passed sg's. Now this can be less or it can
One more comment on the patch...
On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 06:28:48PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
+ /* Check for overflow */
+ if (buflen scsi_bufflen(srb)) {
This really should have an unlikely() around it. This is an often-executed
code path, and we want to optimize it as much as
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 07:19:57PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
scsi_scan is issuing a 36-byte INQUIRY request to llds. isd200 would
volunteer 96 bytes of INQUIRY. This caused an underflow condition in
protocol.c usb_stor_access_xfer_buf(). So first fix is to
usb_stor_access_xfer_buf()
On Thu, Jan 31 2008 at 20:00 +0200, Greg KH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 07:19:57PM +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
scsi_scan is issuing a 36-byte INQUIRY request to llds. isd200 would
volunteer 96 bytes of INQUIRY. This caused an underflow condition in
protocol.c
On Thu, Jan 31 2008 at 21:34 +0200, Alan Stern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
On Thu, Jan 31 2008 at 19:49 +0200, Alan Stern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
@@ -228,9 +228,14 @@ void usb_stor_set_xfer_buf(unsigned char
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
The code in usb_stor_access_xfer_buf() will
now correctly attempt to transfer according to buflen and what ever is
available
at the passed sg's. Now this can be less or it can be more. SCSI standard
defines
this as underflow/overflow. When
16 matches
Mail list logo
