I have spoken with anther member and the idea to be draft will statisfy
Linux needs.
Because there is no lock to enable/disable vender unique commands and no
language that protects against its use.
The 1ST proposal that I will put forward will state something like this:
All devices shall reject all vender-specific commands when the
vender-unique enable is not set. In addition enabling any vender-specific
commands shall not be done by anyone but the vender of the product.
The 2ND proposal that I will put forward will state something like this:
The HOST portion of the reporting-logs will be defined as a a record to
record the time and date of these vender-unique enable calls. This will
be a write only and shall not earasable by any means. In addition the
vender shall provide a signature the authenticates the approved access,
and all other accesses should not provide a signature.
With these two in place the filter can ignored for the uses put before
eariler.
It has taken a lot of wacking over my think skull but I have agreed that
this was view in a light that was protective. I was partly correct in the
reading of the SPEC, but it left HOLEs that resulted in actions pushed
forward.
Because the word "shall" == must always do regardless.
You can not fault me for trying to follow the standard.
You can fault me fore being an ARSE, and a GOOD on at that.....
Andre Hedrick
The Linux ATA/IDE guy
-
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 - 21:00:17 EST