linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] IB/core: Make ib_mad_client

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: <20180430230108.GE26909@ziepe.ca>
Date:   Mon, 30 Apr 2018 17:01:08 -0600
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To:     Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>
Cc:     jackm <jackm@....mellanox.co.il>,
        Håkon Bugge <haakon.bugge@...cle.com>,
        Don Hiatt <don.hiatt@...el.com>,
        Dasaratharaman Chandramouli 
        <dasaratharaman.chandramouli@...el.com>,
        Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
        Sean Hefty <sean.hefty@...el.com>,
        OFED mailing list <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IB/core: Make ib_mad_client_id atomic

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 01:10:49PM -0400, Doug Ledford wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-04-30 at 08:49 -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:16:18PM +0300, jackm wrote:
> > 
> > > > > TIDs need to be globally unique on the entire machine.  
> > > Jason, that is not exactly correct.
> > 
> > The expecation for /dev/umad users is that they all receive locally
> > unique TID prefixes. The kernel may be OK to keep things port-specific
> > but it is slightly breaking the API we are presenting to userspace to
> > allow them to alias..
> > 
> > Jason
> 
> Would people be happier with this commit message then:
> 
> IB/core: Make ib_mad_client_id atomic
>   
> Currently, the kernel protects access to the agent ID allocator on a per
> port basis using a spinlock, so it is impossible for two apps/threads on
> the same port to get the same TID, but it is entirely possible for two
> threads on different ports to end up with the same TID.  
> 
> As this can be confusing (regardless of it being legal according to the
> IB Spec 1.3, C13-18.1.1, in section 13.4.6.4 - TransactionID usage),
> and as the rdma-core user space API for /dev/umad devices implies unique
> TIDs even across ports, make the TID an atomic type so that no two
> allocations, regardless of port number, will be the same.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Håkon Bugge <haakon.bugge@...cle.com>
> Reviewed-by: Jack Morgenstein <jackm@....mellanox.co.il>
> Reviewed-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
> Reviewed-by: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@...cle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>

fine for me

Jason