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: <1f87a8c2-7a47-119a-1141-250d05678546@linux.alibaba.com>
Date:   Thu, 24 Nov 2022 16:53:33 +0800
From:   "D. Wythe" <alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     Jan Karcher <jaka@...ux.ibm.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 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.

Thanks
D. Wythe