| Message ID | 1500043291-19768-3-git-send-email-mustafa.ismail@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
> Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2] RDMA/core: Initialize port_num in qp_attr > > Initialize the port_num for iWARP in rdma_init_qp_attr. > > Fixes: 5ecce4c9b17b("Check port number supplied by user verbs cmds") > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v2.6.14+ > Reviewed-by: Steve Wise <swise@opengridcomputing.com> > Signed-off-by: Mustafa Ismail <mustafa.ismail@intel.com> Tested-by: Mike Marciniszyn <mike.marciniszyn@intel.com> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> From: linux-rdma-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-rdma- > owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Marciniszyn, Mike > > Initialize the port_num for iWARP in rdma_init_qp_attr. > > > > Fixes: 5ecce4c9b17b("Check port number supplied by user verbs cmds") > > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v2.6.14+ > > Reviewed-by: Steve Wise <swise@opengridcomputing.com> > > Signed-off-by: Mustafa Ismail <mustafa.ismail@intel.com> > Why is the second patch required if you only validate the port_num if the IB_QP_PORT mask is on? Given the first patch [PATCH v2 1/2] RDMA/uverbs: Fix the check for port number, this one seems redundant. Thanks, Michal -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> -----Original Message----- > From: Kalderon, Michal [mailto:Michal.Kalderon@cavium.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 3:10 AM > To: Marciniszyn, Mike <mike.marciniszyn@intel.com>; Ismail, Mustafa > <mustafa.ismail@intel.com>; linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org; > dledford@redhat.com > Cc: swise@opengridcomputing.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; > stable@vger.kernel.org; e1000-rdma@lists.sourceforge.net; Saleem, Shiraz > <shiraz.saleem@intel.com>; Amrani, Ram <Ram.Amrani@cavium.com> > Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] RDMA/core: Initialize port_num in qp_attr > > > From: linux-rdma-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-rdma- > > owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Marciniszyn, Mike > > > Initialize the port_num for iWARP in rdma_init_qp_attr. > > > > > > Fixes: 5ecce4c9b17b("Check port number supplied by user verbs cmds") > > > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v2.6.14+ > > > Reviewed-by: Steve Wise <swise@opengridcomputing.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Mustafa Ismail <mustafa.ismail@intel.com> > > > Why is the second patch required if you only validate the port_num if the > IB_QP_PORT mask is on? > Given the first patch [PATCH v2 1/2] RDMA/uverbs: Fix the check for port > number, this one seems redundant. Strictly speaking it is not required, but we felt it safer to always return a valid port number as is done in the IB case. Regards, Mustafa -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
From: Ismail, Mustafa <mustafa.ismail@intel.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 5:38 PM > > > > Fixes: 5ecce4c9b17b("Check port number supplied by user verbs cmds") > > > > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v2.6.14+ > > > > Reviewed-by: Steve Wise <swise@opengridcomputing.com> > > > > Signed-off-by: Mustafa Ismail <mustafa.ismail@intel.com> > > > > > Why is the second patch required if you only validate the port_num if the > > IB_QP_PORT mask is on? > > Given the first patch [PATCH v2 1/2] RDMA/uverbs: Fix the check for port > > number, this one seems redundant. > Strictly speaking it is not required, but we felt it safer to always return a valid port number > as is done in the IB case. It's not always initialized in the IB case either. More than that if at this point you'll initialize it for ib as well you'll get a failure on ib_modify_qp_is_ok, since when transitioning to RTR / RTS providing IB_QP_PORT is not a valid option. We actually hit this issue when running rping over RoCE. (prior to your fix i mean ) I agree that in general there's no real harm, but it seems a bit out of context, and if we make the change common for ib/iwarp we'll have to modify ib_modify_qp_is_ok which is written close to the spec. thanks, Michal -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/core/cma.c b/drivers/infiniband/core/cma.c index 31bb82d..d65a093 100644 --- a/drivers/infiniband/core/cma.c +++ b/drivers/infiniband/core/cma.c @@ -1044,6 +1044,8 @@ int rdma_init_qp_attr(struct rdma_cm_id *id, struct ib_qp_attr *qp_attr, } else ret = iw_cm_init_qp_attr(id_priv->cm_id.iw, qp_attr, qp_attr_mask); + qp_attr->port_num = id_priv->id.port_num; + *qp_attr_mask |= IB_QP_PORT; } else ret = -ENOSYS;
Initialize the port_num for iWARP in rdma_init_qp_attr. Fixes: 5ecce4c9b17b("Check port number supplied by user verbs cmds") Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v2.6.14+ Reviewed-by: Steve Wise <swise@opengridcomputing.com> Signed-off-by: Mustafa Ismail <mustafa.ismail@intel.com> --- drivers/infiniband/core/cma.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)