netdev - Re: [PATCH rdma-next 07/10] RDMA/efa: Allow passing of optional access flags for MR registration

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, 21 Jan 2020 18:57:39 +0200
From:   Yishai Hadas <yishaih@....mellanox.co.il>
To:     Gal Pressman <galpress@...zon.com>
Cc:     Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...lanox.com>, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
        jgg@...lanox.com, dledford@...hat.com, saeedm@...lanox.com,
        maorg@...lanox.com, michaelgur@...lanox.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH rdma-next 07/10] RDMA/efa: Allow passing of optional
 access flags for MR registration

On 1/21/2020 6:37 PM, Gal Pressman wrote:
> On 08/01/2020 20:05, Yishai Hadas wrote:
>> From: Michael Guralnik <michaelgur@...lanox.com>
>>
>> As part of adding a range of optional access flags that drivers need to
>> be able to accept, mask this range inside efa driver.
>> This will prevent the driver from failing when an access flag from
>> that range is passed.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michael Guralnik <michaelgur@...lanox.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...lanox.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/infiniband/hw/efa/efa_verbs.c | 1 +
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/efa/efa_verbs.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/efa/efa_verbs.c
>> index 50c2257..b6b936c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/efa/efa_verbs.c
>> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/efa/efa_verbs.c
>> @@ -1370,6 +1370,7 @@ struct ib_mr *efa_reg_mr(struct ib_pd *ibpd, u64 start, u64 length,
>>   		IB_ACCESS_LOCAL_WRITE |
>>   		(is_rdma_read_cap(dev) ? IB_ACCESS_REMOTE_READ : 0);
>>   
>> +	access_flags &= ~IB_UVERBS_ACCESS_OPTIONAL_RANGE;
> 
> Hi Yishai,
> access_flags should be masked with IB_ACCESS_OPTIONAL instead of
> IB_UVERBS_ACCESS_OPTIONAL_RANGE.
> 

You are talking from namespace point of view, right ? both have same value.

If it's important, can you send some patch to replace ?

> Also, could you please make sure to CC me to future EFA patches?
> 

Sure, thanks.