Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:5 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:5;
Date:   Wed, 13 Sep 2023 13:59:18 +0200
From:   Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc:     linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
        Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
        James Smart <james.smart@broadcom.com>,
        Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v1 4/4] nvmet-discovery: do not use invalid port
Message-ID: <nnvprosph2h6ydtl2fcsseppgyrlju2bnc76lxmgcd6cbk62fo@vmdgzstnn2pz>
References: <20230829091350.16156-1-dwagner@suse.de>
 <20230829091350.16156-5-dwagner@suse.de>
 <20230905065032.GC19701@lst.de>
 <vml2mmhjurjaalzcmugnu2c4cm4okfkl43swbmudmaotew4gsy@o4q44el473to>
 <ebfmki7mifmo67x27wwrdpabdbiamalj7rsevxvabyi4sff4ck@4d5fyvrjggkw>
 <pti3xai6zkvitsqaw54sxut4lpb4qupo4c2n5alesb35ndhxv4@ni7ritoqopfe>
 <pzgeaisqmqz5up5fiorl46lmb6xglpdu4hp5lxotclnzvpfjrj@mgyfvcrvpl4x>
 <20230913113519.GA1565@lst.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230913113519.GA1565@lst.de>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 01:35:19PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> So that's interesting.  But what I'm mostly worried about is how the
> nvmet kernel code allows a request without ->port to progress to the
> actual command handler.

nvmet_fc_handle_fcp_rqst()

	if (tgtport->pe)
		fod->req.port = tgtport->pe->port;

Not sure why this is there. Will test what happens when we just return
an error when we don't have pe set.

> We should never allow a command to get that
> far if ->port is NULL, and should not allow to clear ->port while
> commands are still handled.

Okay, makes sense. I'll test this when I have access to my rig again tomorrow.