netdev - Re: net/smc and the RDMA core

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: <1493659776.2665.7.camel@sandisk.com>
Date:   Mon, 1 May 2017 17:29:38 +0000
From:   Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@...disk.com>
To:     "hch@....de" <hch@....de>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "ubraun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <ubraun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: net/smc and the RDMA core

On Mon, 2017-05-01 at 18:33 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Hi Ursual, hi netdev reviewers,
> 
> how did the smc protocol manage to get merged without any review 
> on linux-rdma at all?  As the results it seems it's very substandard
> in terms of RDMA API usage, e.g. it neither uses the proper CQ API
> nor the RDMA R/W API, and other will probably find additional issues
> as well.

Hello Dave and Ursula,

It seems very rude to me to have merged the SMC protocol driver without
having involved the linux-rdma community. Anyway, I have the following
questions for Dave and Ursula:
* Since the Linux kernel is standards based: where can we find the standard
  that defines the SMC wire protocol? If this protocol has not been
  standardized yet: in what file (other than *.[ch]) in the Linux kernel
  tree has this protocol been documented?
* What are the differences between the SMC protocol, the SDP protocol and
  the rsockets protocol? How do existing implementations for these protocols
  compare to each other from a performance point of view? If no performance
  comparison between these protocols is available, shouldn't the performance
  of these protocols have been compared with each other before a review of
  the SMC driver even started?
* What are the reasons why the SDP driver was never accepted upstream? Do
  the arguments why SDP was not accepted upstream also apply to the SMC
  driver (SDP = Sockets Direct Protocol)?
* Since SMC has to be selected by specifying AF_SMC, how are users expected
  to specify whether AF_INET, AF_INET6 or yet another address family should
  be used to set up a connection between SMC
endpoints?
* Is the SMC driver limited to RoCE? Are you aware that the rsockets library
  supports multiple transport layers (RoCE, IB and iWARP)?
* Since functionality that is similar what the SMC driver provides already
  exists in user space (rsockets), why has this functionality been
  reimplemented as a kernel driver (SMC)?

Bart.