netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/4] net/smc: remove the fallback in __smc

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: <89b65343-2345-4b4f-ad3f-5410c5436e8b@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2024 09:23:53 +0200
From: Wenjia Zhang <wenjia@...ux.ibm.com>
To: shaozhengchao <shaozhengchao@...wei.com>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
        kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com
Cc: jaka@...ux.ibm.com, alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com, tonylu@...ux.alibaba.com,
        guwen@...ux.alibaba.com, weiyongjun1@...wei.com, yuehaibing@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/4] net/smc: remove the fallback in
 __smc_connect



On 01.08.24 03:22, shaozhengchao wrote:
> Hi Wenjia Zhang:
>     Looks like the logic you're saying is okay. Do I need another patch
> to perfect it? As below:
> diff --git a/net/smc/af_smc.c b/net/smc/af_smc.c
> index 73a875573e7a..b23d15506afc 100644
> --- a/net/smc/af_smc.c
> +++ b/net/smc/af_smc.c
> @@ -1523,7 +1523,7 @@ static int __smc_connect(struct smc_sock *smc)
>                  ini->smcd_version &= ~SMC_V1;
>                  ini->smcr_version = 0;
>                  ini->smc_type_v1 = SMC_TYPE_N;
> -               if (!ini->smcd_version) {
> +               if (!smc_ism_is_v2_capable()) {
>                          rc = SMC_CLC_DECL_GETVLANERR;
>                          goto fallback;
>                  }
> 
> 
> Thank you
> 
> Zhengchao Shao
> 

Hi Zhengchao,

I see your patches series were already applied yesterday. So It's okay 
to let it be now. As I said, your changes are not wrong, just not clean 
enough IMO. Anyway, thanks for your contribution to our code!

Thanks,
Wenjia