netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net/smc: add support for netdevice in containers.

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: Tue, 26 Sep 2023 20:09:03 +0800
From: Dust Li <dust.li@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
	Alexandra Winter <wintera@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Albert Huang <huangjie.albert@...edance.com>,
	Karsten Graul <kgraul@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Wenjia Zhang <wenjia@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Jan Karcher <jaka@...ux.ibm.com>,
	"D. Wythe" <alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com>,
	Tony Lu <tonylu@...ux.alibaba.com>,
	Wen Gu <guwen@...ux.alibaba.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	RDMA mailing list <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net/smc: add support for netdevice in
 containers.

On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 02:41:04PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 01:14:04PM +0200, Alexandra Winter wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On 26.09.23 12:48, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>> > This patch made me wonder, why doesn't SMC use RDMA-CM like all other
>> > in-kernel ULPs which work over RDMA?
>> > 
>> > Thanks
>> 
>> The idea behind SMC is that it should look an feel to the applications
>> like TCP sockets. So for connection management it uses TCP over IP;
>> RDMA is just used for the data transfer.
>
>I think that it is not different from other ULPs. For example, RDS works
>over sockets and doesn't touch or reimplement GID management logic.

I think the difference is SMC socket need to be compatible with TCP
socket, so it need a tcp socket to fallback when something is not working.

If SMC works with rdmacm, it still need a fallback-to-tcp socket, and
the tcp connection has to be established for each SMC socket before the
SMC socket got established, that would make rdmacm meaningless.

Best regards,
Dust

>
>Thanks