netdev - Re: [PATCH rdma-next 2/5] RDMA/core: Don't depend device ODP capabilities on kconfig option

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: <20181220175020.GD3940@mtr-leonro.mtl.com>
Date:   Thu, 20 Dec 2018 19:50:20 +0200
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
Cc:     Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        RDMA mailing list <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        Haggai Eran <haggaie@...lanox.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        linux-netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH rdma-next 2/5] RDMA/core: Don't depend device ODP
 capabilities on kconfig option

On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 05:33:11PM +0000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 07:29:56PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 05:20:51PM +0000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 11:23:15AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>
> > > >
> > > > Device capability bits are exposing what specific device supports from
> > > > HW perspective. Those bits are not dependent on kernel configurations
> > > > and RDMA/core should ensure that proper interfaces to users will be
> > > > disabled if CONFIG_INFINIBAND_ON_DEMAND_PAGING is not set.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: f4056bfd8ccf ("IB/core: Add on demand paging caps to ib_uverbs_ex_query_device")
> > > > Fixes: 8cdd312cfed7 ("IB/mlx5: Implement the ODP capability query verb")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>
> > > >  drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_cmd.c | 2 --
> > > >  drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c    | 2 --
> > > >  2 files changed, 4 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_cmd.c b/drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_cmd.c
> > > > index 6b12cc5f97b2..549d9eedf62e 100644
> > > > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_cmd.c
> > > > @@ -3609,7 +3609,6 @@ static int ib_uverbs_ex_query_device(struct uverbs_attr_bundle *attrs)
> > > >
> > > >  	copy_query_dev_fields(ucontext, &resp.base, &attr);
> > > >
> > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_INFINIBAND_ON_DEMAND_PAGING
> > > >  	resp.odp_caps.general_caps = attr.odp_caps.general_caps;
> > > >  	resp.odp_caps.per_transport_caps.rc_odp_caps =
> > > >  		attr.odp_caps.per_transport_caps.rc_odp_caps;
> > > > @@ -3617,7 +3616,6 @@ static int ib_uverbs_ex_query_device(struct uverbs_attr_bundle *attrs)
> > > >  		attr.odp_caps.per_transport_caps.uc_odp_caps;
> > > >  	resp.odp_caps.per_transport_caps.ud_odp_caps =
> > > >  		attr.odp_caps.per_transport_caps.ud_odp_caps;
> > > > -#endif
> > >
> > > This one is maybe OK, assuming the driver fills in 0..
> > >
> > > >  	resp.timestamp_mask = attr.timestamp_mask;
> > > >  	resp.hca_core_clock = attr.hca_core_clock;
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> > > > index 6584e638387a..d7e5ba5034aa 100644
> > > > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
> > > > @@ -923,11 +923,9 @@ static int mlx5_ib_query_device(struct ib_device *ibdev,
> > > >  	props->hca_core_clock = MLX5_CAP_GEN(mdev, device_frequency_khz);
> > > >  	props->timestamp_mask = 0x7FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFULL;
> > > >
> > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_INFINIBAND_ON_DEMAND_PAGING
> > > >  	if (MLX5_CAP_GEN(mdev, pg))
> > > >  		props->device_cap_flags |= IB_DEVICE_ON_DEMAND_PAGING;
> > > >  	props->odp_caps = dev->odp_caps;
> > > > -#endif
> > >
> > > But shouldn't this be protected? If the driver has compiled out ODP it
> > > shouldn't set the cap flag...
> >
> > I see those capabilities as device properties and not as kernel ones.
> >
> > Current situation looks bad for me, when I have same device which
> > reports differently information depends on some compilation flag.
>
> It is not device capabilities, it is a kernel API capability if the
> API is not available the bit should not be set.

Is it better? Should I resend the series?

diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
index 0b68795fb04e..c95c2f545b8f 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
@@ -925,7 +925,8 @@ static int mlx5_ib_query_device(struct ib_device *ibdev,

        if (MLX5_CAP_GEN(mdev, pg))
                props->device_cap_flags |=  IB_DEVICE_ON_DEMAND_PAGING;
-       props->odp_caps = dev->odp_caps;
+       if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INFINIBAND_ON_DEMAND_PAGING))
+               props->odp_caps =  dev->odp_caps;

        if (MLX5_CAP_GEN(mdev, cd))
                props->device_cap_flags |= IB_DEVICE_CROSS_CHANNEL;


>
> The field is badly named.
>
> Jason

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (802 bytes)