linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/13] ibmvfc: add vhost fields and defaults for MQ enablement

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: <8f637bcf-c9b4-9bf3-08a9-b3fdf3b7cf40@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Mon, 30 Nov 2020 09:22:21 -0800
From:   Tyrel Datwyler <tyreld@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Brian King <brking@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        james.bottomley@...senpartnership.com
Cc:     martin.petersen@...cle.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        brking@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/13] ibmvfc: add vhost fields and defaults for MQ
 enablement

On 11/27/20 9:45 AM, Brian King wrote:
> On 11/25/20 7:48 PM, Tyrel Datwyler wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc.h b/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc.h
>> index 9d58cfd774d3..8225bdbb127e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc.h
>> +++ b/drivers/scsi/ibmvscsi/ibmvfc.h
>> @@ -41,6 +41,11 @@
>>  #define IBMVFC_DEFAULT_LOG_LEVEL	2
>>  #define IBMVFC_MAX_CDB_LEN		16
>>  #define IBMVFC_CLS3_ERROR		0
>> +#define IBMVFC_MQ			0
> 
> Given that IBMVFC_MQ is getting set to 0 here, that means mq_enabled is also
> always zero, so am I correct that a lot of this code being added is not
> yet capable of being executed?

Not with out a direct intervention from a hard coding a different value when
building the code. See comment below.

> 
>> +#define IBMVFC_SCSI_CHANNELS		0
> 
> Similar comment here...
> 
>> +#define IBMVFC_SCSI_HW_QUEUES		1
> 
> I don't see any subsequent patches in this series that would ever result
> in nr_hw_queues getting set to anything other than 1. Is that future work
> planned or am I missing something?

Yes, there is still some changes to EH that need to be included before those
values are safe to be set to anything else by the average user.

-Tyrel

> 
>> +#define IBMVFC_MIG_NO_SUB_TO_CRQ	0
>> +#define IBMVFC_MIG_NO_N_TO_M		0
>>  
>>  /*
>>   * Ensure we have resources for ERP and initialization:
>> @@ -826,6 +831,10 @@ struct ibmvfc_host {
>>  	int delay_init;
>>  	int scan_complete;
>>  	int logged_in;
>> +	int mq_enabled;
>> +	int using_channels;
>> +	int do_enquiry;
>> +	int client_scsi_channels;
>>  	int aborting_passthru;
>>  	int events_to_log;
>>  #define IBMVFC_AE_LINKUP	0x0001
>>
> 
>