Message ID | 20191230102942.18395-1-jinpuwang@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | RTRS (former IBTRS) rdma transport library and RNBD (former IBNBD) rdma network block device | expand |
On 2019-12-30 02:29, Jack Wang wrote: > here is V6 of the RTRS (former IBTRS) rdma transport library and the > corresponding RNBD (former IBNBD) rdma network block device. Please provide more information about the RTRS_IO_RSP_IMM and RTRS_IO_RSP_W_INV_IMM server to client message types. Does one of these message types perhaps mean that the receiver of the message is responsible for invalidating the rkey associated with the RDMA transfer? Thanks, Bart.
On 2019-12-30 02:29, Jack Wang wrote: > here is V6 of the RTRS (former IBTRS) rdma transport library and the > corresponding RNBD (former IBNBD) rdma network block device. > > Changelog since v5: > 1 rebased to linux-5.5-rc4 > 2 fix typo in my email address in first patch > 3 cleanup copyright as suggested by Leon Romanovsky > 4 remove 2 redudant kobject_del in error path as suggested by Leon Romanovsky > 5 add MAINTAINERS entries in alphabetical order as Gal Pressman suggested Please always include the full changelog when posting a new version. Every other Linux kernel patch series I have seen includes a full changelog in version two and later versions of its cover letter. Information about how this patch series has been tested would be welcome. How big were the changes between v4 and v5 and how much testing have these changes received? Was this patch series tested in the Ionos data center or is it the out-of-tree version of these drivers that runs in the Ionos data center? Thanks, Bart.
On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 1:11 AM Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> wrote: > > On 2019-12-30 02:29, Jack Wang wrote: > > here is V6 of the RTRS (former IBTRS) rdma transport library and the > > corresponding RNBD (former IBNBD) rdma network block device. > > Please provide more information about the RTRS_IO_RSP_IMM and > RTRS_IO_RSP_W_INV_IMM server to client message types. Does one of these > message types perhaps mean that the receiver of the message is > responsible for invalidating the rkey associated with the RDMA transfer? > > Thanks, > > Bart. Hi Bart, You're right, RTRS_IO_RSP_W_INV_IMM means the client upon receiving the message should invalidate the rkey associated with the RDMA transfer. We will document it in README PROTOCOL part. Thanks, Jack
On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 3:39 AM Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org> wrote: > > On 2019-12-30 02:29, Jack Wang wrote: > > here is V6 of the RTRS (former IBTRS) rdma transport library and the > > corresponding RNBD (former IBNBD) rdma network block device. > > > > Changelog since v5: > > 1 rebased to linux-5.5-rc4 > > 2 fix typo in my email address in first patch > > 3 cleanup copyright as suggested by Leon Romanovsky > > 4 remove 2 redudant kobject_del in error path as suggested by Leon Romanovsky > > 5 add MAINTAINERS entries in alphabetical order as Gal Pressman suggested > > Please always include the full changelog when posting a new version. > Every other Linux kernel patch series I have seen includes a full > changelog in version two and later versions of its cover letter. Sorry, it was my mistake, will include the full changelog next time. > > Information about how this patch series has been tested would be > welcome. How big were the changes between v4 and v5 and how much testing > have these changes received? Was this patch series tested in the Ionos > data center or is it the out-of-tree version of these drivers that runs > in the Ionos data center? As mentioned in the v5 cover letter, the changes between v4 and v5 "' Main changes are the following: 1. Fix the security problem pointed out by Jason 2. Implement code-style/readability/API/etc suggestions by Bart van Assche 3. Rename IBTRS and IBNBD to RTRS and RNBD accordingly 4. Fileio mode support in rnbd-srv has been removed. The main functional change is a fix for the security problem pointed out by Jason and discussed both on the mailing list and during the last LPC RDMA MC 2019. On the server side we now invalidate in RTRS each rdma buffer before we hand it over to RNBD server and in turn to the block layer. A new rkey is generated and registered for the buffer after it returns back from the block layer and RNBD server. The new rkey is sent back to the client along with the IO result. The procedure is the default behaviour of the driver. This invalidation and registration on each IO causes performance drop of up to 20%. A user of the driver may choose to load the modules with this mechanism switched off (always_invalidate=N), if he understands and can take the risk of a malicious client being able to corrupt memory of a server it is connected to. This might be a reasonable option in a scenario where all the clients and all the servers are located within a secure datacenter. Huge thanks to Bart van Assche for the very detailed review of both RNBD and RTRS. These included suggestions for style fixes, better readability and documentation, code simplifications, eliminating usage of deprecated APIs, too many to name. The transport library and the network block device using it have been renamed to RTRS and RNBD accordingly in order to reflect the fact that they are based on the rdma subsystem and not bound to InfiniBand only. Fileio mode support in rnbd-server is not so efficent as pointed out by Bart, and we can use loop device in between if there is need, hence we just removed the fileio mode support. "' Regarding testing, all the changes have been tested with our regression tests in our staging environment in IONOS data center. it's around 200 test cases, for both always_invalidate=N and always_invalidate=Y configurations. I will mention it in the cover letter next time. Thanks for your comments, Bart. > > Thanks, > > Bart.
On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 06:39:00PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On 2019-12-30 02:29, Jack Wang wrote: > > here is V6 of the RTRS (former IBTRS) rdma transport library and the > > corresponding RNBD (former IBNBD) rdma network block device. > > > > Changelog since v5: > > 1 rebased to linux-5.5-rc4 > > 2 fix typo in my email address in first patch > > 3 cleanup copyright as suggested by Leon Romanovsky > > 4 remove 2 redudant kobject_del in error path as suggested by Leon Romanovsky > > 5 add MAINTAINERS entries in alphabetical order as Gal Pressman suggested > > Please always include the full changelog when posting a new version. > Every other Linux kernel patch series I have seen includes a full > changelog in version two and later versions of its cover letter. We now also like it if you include URLs to lore.kernel.org for the prior submissions. Jason
On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 7:28 PM Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 06:39:00PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > On 2019-12-30 02:29, Jack Wang wrote: > > > here is V6 of the RTRS (former IBTRS) rdma transport library and the > > > corresponding RNBD (former IBNBD) rdma network block device. > > > > > > Changelog since v5: > > > 1 rebased to linux-5.5-rc4 > > > 2 fix typo in my email address in first patch > > > 3 cleanup copyright as suggested by Leon Romanovsky > > > 4 remove 2 redudant kobject_del in error path as suggested by Leon Romanovsky > > > 5 add MAINTAINERS entries in alphabetical order as Gal Pressman suggested > > > > Please always include the full changelog when posting a new version. > > Every other Linux kernel patch series I have seen includes a full > > changelog in version two and later versions of its cover letter. > > We now also like it if you include URLs to lore.kernel.org for the > prior submissions. > > Jason Will do.