netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v5 00/10] optimize the parallelism of SMC-R connections

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: <11182feb-0f41-e9a4-e866-8f917c745a48@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Thu, 24 Nov 2022 14:30:55 +0100
From:   Jan Karcher <jaka@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     "D. Wythe" <alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com>, kgraul@...ux.ibm.com,
        wenjia@...ux.ibm.com
Cc:     kuba@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 00/10] optimize the parallelism of SMC-R
 connections



On 24/11/2022 09:53, D. Wythe wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/24/22 4:33 PM, Jan Karcher wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 24/11/2022 06:55, D. Wythe wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/23/22 11:54 PM, D.Wythe wrote:
>>>> From: "D.Wythe" <alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com>
>>>>
>>>> This patch set attempts to optimize the parallelism of SMC-R 
>>>> connections,
>>>> mainly to reduce unnecessary blocking on locks, and to fix 
>>>> exceptions that
>>>> occur after thoses optimization.
>>>>
>>>
>>>> D. Wythe (10):
>>>>    net/smc: Fix potential panic dues to unprotected
>>>>      smc_llc_srv_add_link()
>>>>    net/smc: fix application data exception
>>>>    net/smc: fix SMC_CLC_DECL_ERR_REGRMB without smc_server_lgr_pending
>>>>    net/smc: remove locks smc_client_lgr_pending and
>>>>      smc_server_lgr_pending
>>>>    net/smc: allow confirm/delete rkey response deliver multiplex
>>>>    net/smc: make SMC_LLC_FLOW_RKEY run concurrently
>>>>    net/smc: llc_conf_mutex refactor, replace it with rw_semaphore
>>>>    net/smc: use read semaphores to reduce unnecessary blocking in
>>>>      smc_buf_create() & smcr_buf_unuse()
>>>>    net/smc: reduce unnecessary blocking in smcr_lgr_reg_rmbs()
>>>>    net/smc: replace mutex rmbs_lock and sndbufs_lock with rw_semaphore
>>>>
>>>>   net/smc/af_smc.c   |  74 ++++----
>>>>   net/smc/smc_core.c | 541 
>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>>>>   net/smc/smc_core.h |  53 +++++-
>>>>   net/smc/smc_llc.c  | 285 ++++++++++++++++++++--------
>>>>   net/smc/smc_llc.h  |   6 +
>>>>   net/smc/smc_wr.c   |  10 -
>>>>   net/smc/smc_wr.h   |  10 +
>>>>   7 files changed, 801 insertions(+), 178 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Jan and Wenjia,
>>>
>>> I'm wondering whether the bug fix patches need to be put together in 
>>> this series. I'm considering
>>> sending these bug fix patches separately now, which may be better, in 
>>> case that our patch
>>> might have other problems. These bug fix patches are mainly 
>>> independent, even without my other
>>> patches, they may be triggered theoretically.
>>
>> Hi D.
>>
>> Wenjia and i just talked about that. For us it would be better 
>> separating the fixes and the new logic.
>> If the fixes are independent feel free to post them to net.
> 
> 
> Got it, I will remove those bug fix patches in the next series and send 
> them separately.
> And thanks a lot for your test, no matter what the final test results 
> are, I will send a new series
> to separate them after your test finished.

Hi D.,

I have some troubles applying your patches.

     error: sha1 information is lacking or useless (net/smc/smc_core.c).
     error: could not build fake ancestor
     Patch failed at 0001 optimize the parallelism of SMC-R connections

Before merging them by hand could you please send the v6 with the fixes 
separated and verify that you are basing on the latest net / net-next tree?

That would make it easier for us to test them.

Thank you
- Jan

> 
> Thanks
> D. Wythe
> 
> 
>