netdev - Re: [PATCH rdma-next v1 12/12] IB/mlx5: Add DEVX support for CQ events

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: <20190624120416.GE5479@mellanox.com>
Date:   Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:04:20 +0000
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
CC:     Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>,
        RDMA mailing list <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...lanox.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        linux-netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH rdma-next v1 12/12] IB/mlx5: Add DEVX support for CQ
 events

On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 08:15:40PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> From: Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...lanox.com>
> 
> Add DEVX support for CQ events by creating and destroying the CQ via
> mlx5_core and set an handler to manage its completions.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...lanox.com>
> Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>
>  drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/devx.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/devx.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/devx.c
> index 49fdce95d6d9..91ccd58ebc05 100644
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/devx.c
> @@ -19,9 +19,12 @@
>  #define UVERBS_MODULE_NAME mlx5_ib
>  #include <rdma/uverbs_named_ioctl.h>
>  
> +static void dispatch_event_fd(struct list_head *fd_list, const void *data);
> +
>  enum devx_obj_flags {
>  	DEVX_OBJ_FLAGS_INDIRECT_MKEY = 1 << 0,
>  	DEVX_OBJ_FLAGS_DCT = 1 << 1,
> +	DEVX_OBJ_FLAGS_CQ = 1 << 2,
>  };
>  
>  struct devx_async_data {
> @@ -94,6 +97,7 @@ struct devx_async_event_file {
>  #define MLX5_MAX_DESTROY_INBOX_SIZE_DW MLX5_ST_SZ_DW(delete_fte_in)
>  struct devx_obj {
>  	struct mlx5_core_dev	*mdev;
> +	struct mlx5_ib_dev	*ib_dev;

This seems strange, why would we need to store the core_dev and the ib_dev
in a struct when ibdev->mdev == core_dev?

Jason