Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:206:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp65349pxj; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 20:26:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzi8dSpbHiSalBhrLO5sAJdx09zIt4DDFWtaF1tYROEmZe/DrmlGNYKpNXJhi20c7CYH44H X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:1d89:: with SMTP id h9mr1854560ila.235.1623900416841; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 20:26:56 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1623900416; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=mA64Z0WK4SNisgRhVknlr4BlJE2OJ+Vs+JFv6B9qPs1/mS0DAHmIc98A0gJT/dpyU2 k5m/IIsYQbfBw59a1HNb05jUKVq5D17UeVNkh9Yqrt/Ai2uEVazVL+nayYq1r92NeL5i ygg0maRSzlSgm7R8RnC6T8CsBlwjqhJ6+XFv/tXo49iddPZVAYlA/z3w3uxiWLueCWqR 7G2Ol/WPEv2amtU9M6sTH8tYAFgAu1sekWjx3/8tM46Cq6BMq37bTTp6Q3TE0mVtHizo n+E9GP14Dz/Rf2f9ZpRNs5FZPSyEx9uHBwnVBd+xexIhgcdXuMhRltAr7IQ78M/jNEW+ /Rgw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=x7DwxcFCd1p5P+EorgC8F7UVzZW6qxe9x2jwux/Vn+g=; b=MhFY+pESEArPfuR6iovq7EZ/ZcOvvHOuktjP+qxt+Nu7jSies/pcyfs66+H4GrPjIq dDcGAbTuWHss6OuwEwn6OnRuIp+BNCvChR06Eq4a6ug1ZCxAltB5H+2/AVBolP0EF5/q XFRTUWy1Pa3eUuwsa7Z0UxdAaaZwKFnGDava7EkZk6kbR4NP9O3FBFs7uamT1JqV7s4C ZGLlGW9dZn0mck+qWI5ZIVJyfChV2Zj+OdaszXoDyBNB2jkrfc6EX2WYHJ6c8Lhg69Bw nxcKQLKqyO7/RZFnNb8apwu8IH/CDGZ1D7+PzeoALoVQlkLyrqyhs3Og8/WuuG1GkrA1 qlAQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=AzmeQwm0; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id y28si4300739iox.1.2021.06.16.20.26.44; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 20:26:56 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=AzmeQwm0; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230291AbhFQD12 (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 16 Jun 2021 23:27:28 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:53534 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230269AbhFQD11 (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jun 2021 23:27:27 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7A373613E2; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 03:25:20 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1623900320; bh=J0kzdhaMtpUvhbUW6biNjc2y50gU7Sy+I3gf/5v19Xw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=AzmeQwm0Mm9a2QQ4rlF5B/3kk2Ym5VIE/9YrI00DosgWiREjUivMMufy/WNlEHuez UpX4TOy/7k2cE/vSuI6Kis0TXF/a/O98gYEKz2RnjsKbaXbPkHkjOm6+2dZ9nS3Xjl e7SXa6tle0ASPATqjVFrXh29nQsXaGve1ZjQgIUTS5QbHEdmr7Khj5/DxOW8MQU7gw xiZucwiJNAj4ZjI83TnToeqx3h6zjZEmlHWc4cDVyyCAnS5xSx3XP0tRTFNv0y2OKl XBdl2+uW2GSKE8/nztvlcsNqXrPMlXRzxi1ALnEAXEfF8yxi2OTWQN4j3kHqFtz31c a3ZMz9VAqVbbQ== Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 20:25:19 -0700 From: Eric Biggers To: Satya Tangirala Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/10] mmc: handle error from blk_ksm_register() Message-ID: References: <20210604195900.2096121-1-satyat@google.com> <20210604195900.2096121-8-satyat@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210604195900.2096121-8-satyat@google.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 07:58:57PM +0000, Satya Tangirala wrote: > Handle any error from blk_ksm_register() in the callers. Previously, > the callers ignored the return value because blk_ksm_register() wouldn't > fail as long as the request_queue didn't have integrity support too, but > as this is no longer the case, it's safer for the callers to just handle > the return value appropriately. > > Signed-off-by: Satya Tangirala > --- > drivers/mmc/core/crypto.c | 13 +++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/crypto.c b/drivers/mmc/core/crypto.c > index 419a368f8402..cccd8c7d7e7a 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/core/crypto.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/crypto.c > @@ -21,8 +21,17 @@ void mmc_crypto_set_initial_state(struct mmc_host *host) > > void mmc_crypto_setup_queue(struct request_queue *q, struct mmc_host *host) > { > - if (host->caps2 & MMC_CAP2_CRYPTO) > - blk_ksm_register(&host->ksm, q); > + if (host->caps2 & MMC_CAP2_CRYPTO) { > + /* > + * This WARN_ON should never trigger since &host->ksm won't be > + * "empty" (i.e. will support at least 1 crypto capability), an > + * MMC device's request queue doesn't support integrity, and > + * it also satisfies all the block layer constraints (i.e. > + * supports SG gaps, doesn't have chunk sectors, has a > + * sufficiently large supported max_segments per bio) > + */ > + WARN_ON(!blk_ksm_register(&host->ksm, q)); > + } > } There appear to be some MMC host drivers that set max_segments to 1, so this explanation may not hold. It may hold for every driver that actually supports crypto, though. - Eric