linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v3 10/28] IB/Verbs: Reform cm related part in IB-core cma

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: <1828884A29C6694DAF28B7E6B8A82373A8FC0B58@ORSMSX109.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Mon, 13 Apr 2015 20:31:06 +0000
From:	"Hefty, Sean" <sean.hefty@...el.com>
To:	Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>
CC:	Michael Wang <yun.wang@...fitbricks.com>,
	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>,
	"Weiny, Ira" <ira.weiny@...el.com>, Tom Talpey <tom@...pey.com>,
	Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 10/28] IB/Verbs: Reform cm related part in IB-core cma

> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 07:25:48PM +0000, Hefty, Sean wrote:
> > > @@ -1037,17 +1033,13 @@ void rdma_destroy_id(struct rdma_cm_id *id)
> > >  	mutex_unlock(&id_priv->handler_mutex);
> > >
> > >  	if (id_priv->cma_dev) {
> > > -		switch (rdma_node_get_transport(id_priv->id.device-
> > > >node_type)) {
> > > -		case RDMA_TRANSPORT_IB:
> > > +		if (rdma_ib_or_iboe(id_priv->id.device, id_priv->id.port_num))
> >
> > A listen id can be associated with a device without being associated
> > with a port (see the listen_any_list).  Some other check is needed
> > to handle this case.  I guess the code could check the first port on
> > the device (replace port_num with hardcoded value 1).  Then we
> > wouldn't be any more broken than the code already is.  (The 'break'
> > is conceptual, not practical.)
> 
> Hum. So, devices on a port must have some compatibility when it comes
> to these invariants. It looks like all ports must have the same
> iwarpyness, for multiple reasons.
> 
> Less clear is how rocee vs ib work within a device... Can you APM
> between those two kinds of ports?

No idea

> All these switches are so ugly :| Function pointers setup in
> iw_/ib_create_cm_id would be a lot clearer and safer.

I noticed this too.  The if checks throughout the cma are becoming unmaintainable.  It may be cleaner if all devices adopted using the cm device function pointers.

> > This appears to be highlighting an architectural flaw in the iboe
> integration.
> 
> You mean iwarp?

I meant iboe.  Wildcard listens map to multiple listens, one per device.  The assumption being that all ports on the device are the same.  IBoE changed that assumption.
--
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/