linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 07/28] IB/Verbs: Reform IB-ulp ipoib

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <552E1A1A.4090704@profitbricks.com>
Date:	Wed, 15 Apr 2015 09:58:18 +0200
From:	Michael Wang <yun.wang@...fitbricks.com>
To:	Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
	"Hefty, Sean" <sean.hefty@...el.com>
CC:	"Weiny, Ira" <ira.weiny@...el.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>,
	Tom Talpey <tom@...pey.com>, Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/28] IB/Verbs: Reform IB-ulp ipoib



On 04/14/2015 08:21 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 06:02:47PM +0000, Hefty, Sean wrote:
>>> Yes, that is the only reasonable thing that could happen.
>>>
>>> init failure should only be possible under exceptional cases (OOM).
>>>
>>> The only system response is to call ib_umad_add_one again - so of
>>> course the first call had to completely clean up everything it did.
>>
>> A reasonable follow up change would be to replace the add device
>> callbacks with add port callbacks.
> 
> Yes, combined with a port argument to ib_set_client_data /
> ib_get_client_data it would be a nice simplifying clean up.
> 
> It would be nice to have sane error handling too :( In an ideal world
> the add call back should return an error and the thing that triggered
> it should unwind back to module load failure.

We can give client->add() callback a return value and make ib_register_device()
return -ENOMEM when it failed, just wondering why we don't do this at first, any
special reason?

Regards,
Michael Wang

> 
> Jason
> 
--
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/