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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2022 07:54:51 +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 20:53, D. Wythe wrote: > > > On 11/24/22 9:30 PM, Jan Karcher wrote: >> >> >> 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 >> > > Hi Jan, > > It's quite weird, it seems that my patch did based on the latest > net-next tree. > And I try apply it the latest net tree, it's seems work to me too. Maybe > there > is something wrong with the mirror I use. Can you show me the conflict > described > in the .rej file? Hi D., sorry for the delayed reply: I just re-tried it with path instead of git am and i think i messed it up yesterday. Mea culpa. With patch your changes *can* be applied to the latest net-next. I'm very sorry for the inconvenience. Could you still please send the v6. That way i can verify the fixes separate and we can - if the tests succeed - already apply them. Sorry and thank you - Jan > > Thanks. > D. Wythe > > > > > > >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists