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: <20190624180626.GM7418@mellanox.com>
Date:   Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:06:29 +0000
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
To:     Yishai Hadas <yishaih@....mellanox.co.il>
CC:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
        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 Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 08:03:07PM +0300, Yishai Hadas wrote:
> On 6/24/2019 3:04 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > 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?
> > 
> 
> We need to add the ib_dev as we can't access it from the core_dev.
> Most of this patch we can probably go and drop the mdev and access it from
> ib_dev, I preferred to not handle that in this patch.

Should add a patch to revise it then

Jason