linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] nvme-tcp: Do not reset transport on data digest errors

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: <2e91c065-d3c6-1bef-5906-1a4648368894@grimberg.me>
Date:   Tue, 10 Aug 2021 18:02:36 -0700
From:   Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>
To:     Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.de>
Cc:     linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>, yi.he@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme-tcp: Do not reset transport on data digest errors


> Hi Sagi,
> 
> On Fri, Aug 06, 2021 at 12:42:00PM -0700, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
>>> @@ -89,6 +89,7 @@ struct nvme_tcp_queue {
>>>    	size_t			data_remaining;
>>>    	size_t			ddgst_remaining;
>>>    	unsigned int		nr_cqe;
>>> +	u16			status;
>>
>> Why is this a queue member and not a request member?
> 
> I was not sure if the TCP transport specific error handling should
> impact all other transport (size of struct request). Also I tried to
> avoid accessing cachelines which are not already in use. Except this I
> don't see there should be no problem to put this to struct request.

It is the correct place, lets see that it doesn't increase the struct.