netdev - RE: [PATCH v3 for-next 05/13] IB/cm: Reference count ib_cm

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]

Date:	Tue, 19 May 2015 22:52:59 +0000
From:	"Hefty, Sean" <sean.hefty@...el.com>
To:	Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>
CC:	Haggai Eran <haggaie@...lanox.com>,
	Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
	"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Liran Liss <liranl@...lanox.com>,
	Guy Shapiro <guysh@...lanox.com>,
	Shachar Raindel <raindel@...lanox.com>,
	Yotam Kenneth <yotamke@...lanox.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 for-next 05/13] IB/cm: Reference count ib_cm_ids

> I find Haggai's argument compelling, it is a very small amount of code
> and data to add a sharing count, and a very large amount to duplicate
> the whole service id map into cma.c.

I get wanting to share the listen list, but we end up with this:

> drivers/infiniband/core/cm.c                       | 129 +++++-

that's more code than what the ib_cm module uses to track listens, and the result is a solution that ends up being split in a weird fashion between the ib_cm, iw_cm (TBD), and rdma_cm.

I wonder if the existing ib_cm interface is even what we want.  Currently, the rdma_cm pushes the private data (i.e. IP address) comparison into the ib_cm.  This is only used by the rdma_cm.  Should that instead be moved out of the ib_cm and handled in the rdma_cm?  And then update the ib_cm to support multiple listens on the same service id.

For example, the ib_cm could simply queue all listen requests on the same service id.  When a REQ arrives, it just calls each listener back until one 'claims' the REQ.  The destruction of a listener could then be synced with the callback.  From what I can tell, the current proposal requires that the ib_cm user be prepared to receive a REQ callback for a listen that it has already destroyed.  If needed, a flag can be added to the ib_cm_listen to indicate if the service id is shared/exclusive.

- Sean 
--
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