netdev - RE: [PATCH 15/22] RDMA/irdma: Implement device supported verb APIs

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, 27 Jan 2021 01:04:06 +0000
From:   "Saleem, Shiraz" <shiraz.saleem@...el.com>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
CC:     "dledford@...hat.com" <dledford@...hat.com>,
        "jgg@...dia.com" <jgg@...dia.com>,
        "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Ertman, David M" <david.m.ertman@...el.com>,
        "Nguyen, Anthony L" <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
        "Ismail, Mustafa" <mustafa.ismail@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 15/22] RDMA/irdma: Implement device supported verb APIs

> Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/22] RDMA/irdma: Implement device supported verb APIs
> 
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 05:48:20PM -0600, Shiraz Saleem wrote:
> > From: Mustafa Ismail <mustafa.ismail@...el.com>
> >
> > Implement device supported verb APIs. The supported APIs vary based on
> > the underlying transport the ibdev is registered as (i.e. iWARP or
> > RoCEv2).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mustafa Ismail <mustafa.ismail@...el.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Shiraz Saleem <shiraz.saleem@...el.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/infiniband/hw/irdma/verbs.c     | 4617
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  drivers/infiniband/hw/irdma/verbs.h     |  218 ++
> >  include/uapi/rdma/ib_user_ioctl_verbs.h |    1 +
> >  3 files changed, 4836 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 drivers/infiniband/hw/irdma/verbs.c
> >  create mode 100644 drivers/infiniband/hw/irdma/verbs.h
> 
> <...>
> 
> > +	if (req.userspace_ver > IRDMA_ABI_VER)
> > +		goto ver_error;
> > +
> > +	ucontext->iwdev = iwdev;
> > +	ucontext->abi_ver = req.userspace_ver;
> > +
> > +	uk_attrs = &iwdev->rf->sc_dev.hw_attrs.uk_attrs;
> > +	/* GEN_1 legacy support with libi40iw */
> > +	if (req.userspace_ver <= 5) {
> > +		if (uk_attrs->hw_rev != IRDMA_GEN_1)
> > +			goto ver_error;
> > +
> > +		uresp_gen1.max_qps = iwdev->rf->max_qp;
> > +		uresp_gen1.max_pds = iwdev->rf->sc_dev.hw_attrs.max_hw_pds;
> > +		uresp_gen1.wq_size = iwdev->rf->sc_dev.hw_attrs.max_qp_wr * 2;
> > +		uresp_gen1.kernel_ver = req.userspace_ver;
> > +		if (ib_copy_to_udata(udata, &uresp_gen1,
> > +				     min(sizeof(uresp_gen1), udata->outlen)))
> > +			return -EFAULT;
> > +	} else {
> > +		u64 bar_off =
> > +		    (uintptr_t)iwdev->rf-
> >sc_dev.hw_regs[IRDMA_DB_ADDR_OFFSET];
> > +		ucontext->db_mmap_entry =
> > +			irdma_user_mmap_entry_insert(ucontext, bar_off,
> > +						     IRDMA_MMAP_IO_NC,
> > +						     &uresp.db_mmap_key);
> > +
> > +		if (!ucontext->db_mmap_entry)
> > +			return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > +		uresp.kernel_ver = IRDMA_ABI_VER;
> > +		uresp.feature_flags = uk_attrs->feature_flags;
> > +		uresp.max_hw_wq_frags = uk_attrs->max_hw_wq_frags;
> > +		uresp.max_hw_read_sges = uk_attrs->max_hw_read_sges;
> > +		uresp.max_hw_inline = uk_attrs->max_hw_inline;
> > +		uresp.max_hw_rq_quanta = uk_attrs->max_hw_rq_quanta;
> > +		uresp.max_hw_wq_quanta = uk_attrs->max_hw_wq_quanta;
> > +		uresp.max_hw_sq_chunk = uk_attrs->max_hw_sq_chunk;
> > +		uresp.max_hw_cq_size = uk_attrs->max_hw_cq_size;
> > +		uresp.min_hw_cq_size = uk_attrs->min_hw_cq_size;
> > +		uresp.hw_rev = uk_attrs->hw_rev;
> > +		if (ib_copy_to_udata(udata, &uresp,
> > +				     min(sizeof(uresp), udata->outlen)))
> > +			return -EFAULT;
> > +	}
> 
> i40iw has different logic here, and in old code, if user supplied "req.userspace_ver
> < 4", he will get an error. In new code, it will pass and probably fail later.
> 

Thanks! We will add that check.