netdev - Re: [PATCH mlx5-next 11/15] RDMA/mlx5: Add vport metadata matching for IB representors

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:   Wed, 19 Jun 2019 06:40:16 +0000
From:   Jianbo Liu <jianbol@...lanox.com>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>
CC:     Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        Roi Dayan <roid@...lanox.com>, Mark Bloch <markb@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH mlx5-next 11/15] RDMA/mlx5: Add vport metadata matching
 for IB representors

The 06/19/2019 13:04, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 04:44:26AM +0000, Jianbo Liu wrote:
> > The 06/18/2019 18:19, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 07:23:30PM +0000, Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> > > > From: Jianbo Liu <jianbol@...lanox.com>
> > > >
> > > > If vport metadata matching is enabled in eswitch, the rule created
> > > > must be changed to match on the metadata, instead of source port.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jianbo Liu <jianbol@...lanox.com>
> > > > Reviewed-by: Roi Dayan <roid@...lanox.com>
> > > > Reviewed-by: Mark Bloch <markb@...lanox.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/ib_rep.c | 11 +++++++
> > > >  drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/ib_rep.h | 16 ++++++++++
> > > >  drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c   | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++------
> > > >  3 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/ib_rep.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/ib_rep.c
> > > > index 22e651cb5534..d4ed611de35d 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/ib_rep.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/ib_rep.c
> > > > @@ -131,6 +131,17 @@ struct mlx5_eswitch_rep *mlx5_ib_vport_rep(struct mlx5_eswitch *esw, int vport)
> > > >  	return mlx5_eswitch_vport_rep(esw, vport);
> > > >  }
> > > >
> > > > +u32 mlx5_ib_eswitch_vport_match_metadata_enabled(struct mlx5_eswitch *esw)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	return mlx5_eswitch_vport_match_metadata_enabled(esw);
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > +u32 mlx5_ib_eswitch_get_vport_metadata_for_match(struct mlx5_eswitch *esw,
> > > > +						 u16 vport)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	return mlx5_eswitch_get_vport_metadata_for_match(esw, vport);
> > > > +}
> > >
> > > 1. There is no need to introduce one line functions, call to that code directly.
> >
> > No. They are in IB, and we don't want them be mixed up by the original
> > functions in eswitch. Please ask Mark more about it.
> 
> Please enlighten me.

It was suggested by Mark in prevouis review.
I think it's because there are in different modules, and better to with
different names, so introduce there extra one line functions.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, Mark...

> 
> >
> > > 2. It should be bool and not u32.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> >
> > --

--