linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v3 04/28] IB/Verbs: Reform IB-core cm

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]

Message-ID: <1828884A29C6694DAF28B7E6B8A82373A8FC0A3A@ORSMSX109.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Mon, 13 Apr 2015 18:40:35 +0000
From:	"Hefty, Sean" <sean.hefty@...el.com>
To:	"Weiny, Ira" <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
	Michael Wang <yun.wang@...fitbricks.com>
CC:	Roland Dreier <roland@...nel.org>,
	Hal Rosenstock <hal.rosenstock@...il.com>,
	"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Tom Tucker <tom@...ngridcomputing.com>,
	Steve Wise <swise@...ngridcomputing.com>,
	Hoang-Nam Nguyen <hnguyen@...ibm.com>,
	Christoph Raisch <raisch@...ibm.com>,
	infinipath <infinipath@...el.com>, Eli Cohen <eli@...lanox.com>,
	"Latif, Faisal" <faisal.latif@...el.com>,
	Jack Morgenstein <jackm@....mellanox.co.il>,
	"Or Gerlitz" <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
	Haggai Eran <haggaie@...lanox.com>,
	"Tom Talpey" <tom@...pey.com>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
	Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 04/28] IB/Verbs: Reform IB-core cm

> > -	if (rdma_node_get_transport(ib_device->node_type) !=
> RDMA_TRANSPORT_IB)
> > -		return;
> > +	int count = 0;
> 
> I'm ok with this as an intermediate patch but going forward if we are
> going to
> have calls like
> 
> static inline int cap_ib_cm_dev(struct ib_device *device)

I would rather keep everything to checking per port, not per device.  Specifically, because we have code that does this:

> >  		port = kzalloc(sizeof *port, GFP_KERNEL);
> >  		if (!port)
> >  			goto error1;
> > @@ -3809,7 +3810,16 @@ static void cm_add_one(struct ib_device
> *ib_device)
> >  		ret = ib_modify_port(ib_device, i, 0, &port_modify);
> >  		if (ret)
> >  			goto error3;

It will also help keep the checks consistent, so that we don't end up with CM checks being per device, but SA checks being per port.

- Sean
--
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/