netdev - Re: [PATCH] mlx4: Use GFP_NOFS calls during the ipoib TX path when creating the QP

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAJZOPZKLcFC5Wqv7VS7AyovaeHw3PYSWEz9t9sZ4AMhG+dS1+A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 26 Feb 2014 23:18:50 +0200
From:	Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com>
To:	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
Cc:	Roland Dreier <roland@...nel.org>, Amir Vadai <amirv@...lanox.com>,
	Eli Cohen <eli@....mellanox.co.il>,
	Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
	Eugenia Emantayev <eugenia@...lanox.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mlx4: Use GFP_NOFS calls during the ipoib TX path when
 creating the QP

On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 12:55 AM, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz> wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Feb 2014, Or Gerlitz wrote:
[...]
> That definitely can be verified, and I am putting it on my TODO list.

OK, thanks


> But let's make sure that we don't diverge from the original problem too
> much. Simple fact is that the deadlock is there when using connected mode,
> and there is nothing preventing users from using it this way, therefore I
> believe it should be fixed one way or another.

the patch is titled with "mlx4:" -- do you expect the problem to come
into play only when ipoib connected mode runs over the mlx4 driver?
what's about mlx5 or other upstream IB drivers?

I'll be looking on the details of the problem/solution, but this way
or another the API being module param sounds more like a hack....

Do we have a way to tell a net-device instance they should do their
memory allocations in a NOFS manner? if not, shouldn't we come up with
more general injection method?
--
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