On Tue, 25 Jul 2000, Stephen Frost wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Jul 2000, James Sutherland wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 24 Jul 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
> > > To get what you are asking for would give a kernel source of a gigabyte or
> > > so (just add up all the funny things you might want to send to a random
> > > IDE, SCSI, FireWire, USB, ... device, consider that downloadable firmware
> > > is becomming the norm, and devices are proliferating like never before),
> > > and _that_ doesn't scale at all.
> >
> > A gigabyte? Hardly. It's an if statement we need, that's all. OK, a couple
> > of if statements per subsystem will add up to quite a few Kb - but that'll
> > hardly break the bank.
>
> That depends, are you talking about just filtering the known 'bad'
> things, or filtering down to where only valid commands (with valid data
> mind you, which is a cute thing to try and determine in kernel space) work?
>
> Not that it really matter much, both lead to the dark side and loads
> of cruft that will never be cleaned out, even once the hardware is fixed and
> such filtering of 'invalid' commands with 'invalid' data, or valid commands
> with 'invalid' data is useless.
Simply block all the non-ATA commands. These should never be issued by
anything other than a vendor diagnostics program - and if you're running
one of those, WTF are you doing in a multi-user desktop/server OS at the
time? The commands in question are very specialised and rare. The
manufacturer could just supply a boot image on their WWW site, containing
a simple OS (FreeDOS, cut down Linux, whatever) plus their utility.
James.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 31 2000 - 21:00:19 EST