linux-kernel - Re: [ofa-general] InfiniBand/RDMA merge plans for 2.6.24

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 13 Sep 2007 14:02:57 -0700
From:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
To:	"Sean Hefty" <sean.hefty@...el.com>
Cc:	<general@...ts.openfabrics.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [ofa-general] InfiniBand/RDMA merge plans for 2.6.24

 > > - My user_mad P_Key index support patch.  I'll test the ioctl to
 > >   change to the new mode and merge this I guess, since Hal and Sean
 > >   have tested this out.
 > 
 > I can give this patch a reviewed-by: too, and I will also try to review a couple
 > of the pending ipoib patches.

Thanks!

 > > - Sean's QoS changes.  These look fine at first glance, and I just
 > >   plan to understand the backwards compatibility story (ie how this
 > >   works with an old SM) and merge.  Anyone who objects let me know.
 > 
 > The new QoS fields fall into fields that are currently reserved, which should be
 > ignored by an older SM.  I've only tested this against openSM however.

That seems OK -- I'm OK with breaking things if an SM is clearly buggy
(and not ignoring fields that are defined to be ignored in the spec
would certainly be a clear bug to me).

 > This patch was generated in response to an Intel MPI issue.  We've seen MPI take
 > several minutes to respond to a connection request during the middle of large
 > application runs.  When this happens, the active side times out the connection.
 > In OFED, we added module parameters to adjust the rdma_cm connection timeout on
 > the active side, but I believe that sending an MRA from the passive side is a
 > better solution.

OK -- just to make sure I'm understanding what you're saying: have you
confirmed that your proposed patches actually fix the issue?

 - R.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/