netdev - Re: [PATCH 07/22] RDMA/irdma: Register an auxiliary driver and implement private channel OPs

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:   Mon, 1 Feb 2021 15:21:57 -0400
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To:     "Saleem, Shiraz" <shiraz.saleem@...el.com>
CC:     "dledford@...hat.com" <dledford@...hat.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 07/22] RDMA/irdma: Register an auxiliary driver and
 implement private channel OPs

On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 12:41:41AM +0000, Saleem, Shiraz wrote:
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/22] RDMA/irdma: Register an auxiliary driver and
> > implement private channel OPs
> > 
> > On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 12:42:16AM +0000, Saleem, Shiraz wrote:
> > 
> > > I think this essentially means doing away with .open/.close piece.
> > 
> > Yes, that too, and probably the FSM as well.
> > 
> > > Or are you saying that is ok?  Yes we had a discussion in the past and
> > > I thought we concluded. But maybe I misunderstood.
> > >
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rdma/9DD61F30A802C4429A01CA4200E302A7DCD
> > > 4FD03@...msx124.amr.corp.intel.com/
> > 
> > Well, having now seen how aux bus ended up and the way it effected the
> > mlx5 driver, I am more firmly of the opinion this needs to be fixed. It is extremly
> > hard to get everything right with two different registration schemes running around.
> > 
> > You never answered my question:
> 
> Sorry I missed it.
> > 
> > > Still, you need to be able to cope with the user unbinding your
> > > drivers in any order via sysfs. What happens to the VFs when the PF is
> > > unbound and releases whatever resources? This is where the broadcom
> > > driver ran into troubles..
> > 
> > ?
> 
> echo -n "ice.intel_rdma.0" > /sys/bus/auxiliary/drivers/irdma/unbind  ???
> 
> That I believe will trigger a drv.remove() on the rdma PF side which require
> the rdma VFs to go down.

How? They could be in VMs

Jason