Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754328AbcLSWai (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Dec 2016 17:30:38 -0500 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([134.134.136.65]:16844 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752343AbcLSWag (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Dec 2016 17:30:36 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,375,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="41634119" Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 15:23:12 -0700 From: Scott Bauer To: Keith Busch Cc: linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, Rafael.Antognolli@intel.com, axboe@fb.com, jonathan.derrick@intel.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, hch@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sagi@grimberg.me Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] nvme: Implement resume_from_suspend and SED Allocation code. Message-ID: <20161219222311.GA2056@sbauer-Z170X-UD5> References: <1482176149-2257-1-git-send-email-scott.bauer@intel.com> <1482176149-2257-5-git-send-email-scott.bauer@intel.com> <20161219215954.GB10634@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161219215954.GB10634@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1439 Lines: 38 On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 04:59:54PM -0500, Keith Busch wrote: > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:35:48PM -0700, Scott Bauer wrote: > > +static int nvme_sec_submit(struct nvme_ctrl *ctrl, u16 spsp, u8 secp, > > + void *buffer, size_t len, u8 opcode) > > +{ > > + struct nvme_command cmd = { 0 }; > > + struct nvme_ns *ns = NULL; > > + > > + mutex_lock(&ctrl->namespaces_mutex); > > + if (!list_empty(&ctrl->namespaces)) > > + ns = list_first_entry(&ctrl->namespaces, struct nvme_ns, list); > > + > > + mutex_unlock(&ctrl->namespaces_mutex); > > + if (!ns) > > + return -ENODEV; > > + > > + cmd.common.opcode = opcode; > > + cmd.common.nsid = ns->ns_id; > > Should be: > > cmd.common.nsid = cpu_to_le32(ns->ns_id); > > But now wondering how you can send a security command to different > namespaces. That's why I thought it'd make more sense to threa this > through block_device, but maybe Christoph had some idea on how to get > the same functionality without that? I went back and reviewed the spec 1.2.1: http://www.nvmexpress.org/wp-content/uploads/NVM_Express_1_2_1_Gold_20160603.pdf Section 5.18 (page 140->141) Describes the security send command type and it doesn't have any reference of a namespace ID. Anecdotally, I just removed the ns->ns_id line from the code and everything still works as intended. Is there another portion of the spec or errata that requires ns_id? (I can't access 1.2.1 errta the link doesn't work).