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]

Date:   Tue, 2 May 2017 15:37:07 +0000
From:   Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@...disk.com>
To:     "hch@....de" <hch@....de>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "parav@...lanox.com" <parav@...lanox.com>,
        "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 Tue, 2017-05-02 at 14:41 +0200, Ursula Braun wrote:
> On 05/01/2017 07:55 PM, Parav Pandit wrote:
> > Hi Bart, Ursula, Dave,
> > 
> > I am particularly concerned about SMC as address family.
> > It should not be treated as address family, but rather an additional
> > protocol similar for socket type SOCK_STREAM.
> 
> We tried to avoid changes of the kernel TCP code. A new address family
> seemed to be a feasible way to achieve this.

Hello Ursula,

I agree with Parav that introducing a new address family for SMC was an
unfortunate choice. As one can see in e.g. the implementation of the SCTP
protocol no changes to the TCP implementation are needed to add support
for a new SOCK_STREAM protocol. I think the SCTP implementation uses
inet_register_protosw() to register itself dynamically.

Bart.