linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 14/27] IB/Verbs: Reform cma_acquire

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: <552FBBF5.1010605@dev.mellanox.co.il>
Date:	Thu, 16 Apr 2015 09:41:09 -0400
From:	Hal Rosenstock <hal@....mellanox.co.il>
To:	Michael Wang <yun.wang@...fitbricks.com>
CC:	Roland Dreier <roland@...nel.org>,
	Sean Hefty <sean.hefty@...el.com>,
	Hal Rosenstock <hal.rosenstock@...il.com>,
	linux-rdma@...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>,
	Mike Marciniszyn <infinipath@...el.com>,
	Eli Cohen <eli@...lanox.com>,
	Faisal Latif <faisal.latif@...el.com>,
	Jack Morgenstein <jackm@....mellanox.co.il>,
	Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
	Haggai Eran <haggaie@...lanox.com>,
	Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>, Tom Talpey <tom@...pey.com>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
	Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 14/27] IB/Verbs: Reform cma_acquire_dev()

On 4/16/2015 9:35 AM, Michael Wang wrote:
> 
> 
> On 04/16/2015 03:19 PM, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> [snip]
>>>  
>>> +static inline int cma_validate_port(struct ib_device *device, u8 port,
>>> +				      union ib_gid *gid, int dev_type)
>>> +{
>>> +	u8 found_port;
>>> +	int ret = -ENODEV;
>>> +
>>> +	if ((dev_type == ARPHRD_INFINIBAND) && !rdma_tech_ib(device, port))
>>> +		return ret;
>>> +
>>> +	if ((dev_type != ARPHRD_INFINIBAND) && rdma_tech_ib(device, port))
>>> +		return ret;
>>> +
>>> +	ret = ib_find_cached_gid(device, gid, &found_port, NULL);
>>> +
>>> +	if (!ret && (port == found_port))
>>> +		return 0;
>>> +
>>> +	return ret;
>>
>> Should the case where ret = 0 and port != found_port need to be handled
>> the same as currently ? It looks different to me since in this case the
>> port will be saved into id_priv->id.port_num whereas currently it isn't.
> 
> I get your point :-) what about:
> 
> 	ret = ib_find_cached_gid(device, gid, &found_port, NULL);
> 	if (port != found_port)
> 		return -ENODEV;
> 
> 	return ret;

Yes, that looks to me to be consistent with the current implementation.

-- Hal

> Regards,
> Michael Wang
> 
>>
>> -- Hal
>>
>>> +}
>>> +
>>>  static int cma_acquire_dev(struct rdma_id_private *id_priv,
>>>  			   struct rdma_id_private *listen_id_priv)
>>>  {
>>>  	struct rdma_dev_addr *dev_addr = &id_priv->id.route.addr.dev_addr;
>>>  	struct cma_device *cma_dev;
>>> -	union ib_gid gid, iboe_gid;
>>> +	union ib_gid gid, iboe_gid, *gidp;
>>>  	int ret = -ENODEV;
>>> -	u8 port, found_port;
>>> -	enum rdma_link_layer dev_ll = dev_addr->dev_type == ARPHRD_INFINIBAND ?
>>> -		IB_LINK_LAYER_INFINIBAND : IB_LINK_LAYER_ETHERNET;
>>> +	u8 port;
>>>  
>>> -	if (dev_ll != IB_LINK_LAYER_INFINIBAND &&
>>> +	if (dev_addr->dev_type != ARPHRD_INFINIBAND &&
>>>  	    id_priv->id.ps == RDMA_PS_IPOIB)
>>>  		return -EINVAL;
>>>  
>>> @@ -391,41 +409,36 @@ static int cma_acquire_dev(struct rdma_id_private *id_priv,
>>>  
>>>  	memcpy(&gid, dev_addr->src_dev_addr +
>>>  	       rdma_addr_gid_offset(dev_addr), sizeof gid);
>>> -	if (listen_id_priv &&
>>> -	    rdma_port_get_link_layer(listen_id_priv->id.device,
>>> -				     listen_id_priv->id.port_num) == dev_ll) {
>>> +
>>> +	if (listen_id_priv) {
>>>  		cma_dev = listen_id_priv->cma_dev;
>>>  		port = listen_id_priv->id.port_num;
>>> -		if (rdma_node_get_transport(cma_dev->device->node_type) == RDMA_TRANSPORT_IB &&
>>> -		    rdma_port_get_link_layer(cma_dev->device, port) == IB_LINK_LAYER_ETHERNET)
>>> -			ret = ib_find_cached_gid(cma_dev->device, &iboe_gid,
>>> -						 &found_port, NULL);
>>> -		else
>>> -			ret = ib_find_cached_gid(cma_dev->device, &gid,
>>> -						 &found_port, NULL);
>>> +		gidp = rdma_tech_iboe(cma_dev->device, port) ?
>>> +		       &iboe_gid : &gid;
>>>  
>>> -		if (!ret && (port  == found_port)) {
>>> -			id_priv->id.port_num = found_port;
>>> +		ret = cma_validate_port(cma_dev->device, port, gidp,
>>> +					dev_addr->dev_type);
>>> +		if (!ret) {
>>> +			id_priv->id.port_num = port;
>>>  			goto out;
>>>  		}
>>>  	}
>>> +
>>>  	list_for_each_entry(cma_dev, &dev_list, list) {
>>>  		for (port = 1; port <= cma_dev->device->phys_port_cnt; ++port) {
>>>  			if (listen_id_priv &&
>>>  			    listen_id_priv->cma_dev == cma_dev &&
>>>  			    listen_id_priv->id.port_num == port)
>>>  				continue;
>>> -			if (rdma_port_get_link_layer(cma_dev->device, port) == dev_ll) {
>>> -				if (rdma_node_get_transport(cma_dev->device->node_type) == RDMA_TRANSPORT_IB &&
>>> -				    rdma_port_get_link_layer(cma_dev->device, port) == IB_LINK_LAYER_ETHERNET)
>>> -					ret = ib_find_cached_gid(cma_dev->device, &iboe_gid, &found_port, NULL);
>>> -				else
>>> -					ret = ib_find_cached_gid(cma_dev->device, &gid, &found_port, NULL);
>>> -
>>> -				if (!ret && (port == found_port)) {
>>> -					id_priv->id.port_num = found_port;
>>> -					goto out;
>>> -				}
>>> +
>>> +			gidp = rdma_tech_iboe(cma_dev->device, port) ?
>>> +			       &iboe_gid : &gid;
>>> +
>>> +			ret = cma_validate_port(cma_dev->device, port, gidp,
>>> +						dev_addr->dev_type);
>>> +			if (!ret) {
>>> +				id_priv->id.port_num = port;
>>> +				goto out;
>>>  			}
>>>  		}
>>>  	}
>>
> 

--
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/