netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 4/9] rdma/cm: Update port reservation to support AF

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: <20130213181048.GC1601@obsidianresearch.com>
Date:	Wed, 13 Feb 2013 11:10:48 -0700
From:	Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>
To:	"Hefty, Sean" <sean.hefty@...el.com>
Cc:	Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
	"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/9] rdma/cm: Update port reservation to support AF_IB

On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 05:44:58PM +0000, Hefty, Sean wrote:

> Ultimately, IB establishes communication using 64-bit service IDs, which is what sockaddr_ib exposes.
> 
> The SID mask was proposed by Jason as a way to simplify things.
> Conceptually, AF_IB has a single port space range, the 64-bit SID.
> The mask helps us break the SID into the various ranges, so we can
> clearly know which parts of the SID are fixed, and which can be
> variable.  E.g. when connecting, the entire SID must be provided.
> However, when binding we want to support binding to a specific SID
> or only to a SID range (i.e. port space).

Right. AF_IB is about exposing the native IB CM, rather than a cooked
version of it, so allowing user space to control the entire SID is
desirable.

The intent of the masking was to provide a means for the kernel to
atomically select a process-unique ID (such as the 16 bits the IP
varient requires) for listening.

Other uses of IB CM would use a different prefix, but will still
fundamentally require a machine unique portion.

This addresses a fundamental problem in ib_ucm - there is no way for
multiple processes to co-ordinate on unique SIDs.

Sean, I've lost track of all this over time, but just to check in,
with this new interface, would it be possible to obsolete ib_ucm? That
seems desirable to me, as it is so flawed..

Jason
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html