Re: [PATCH 0/2] User-index fixes

[Doug Ledford <dledford-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2677 bytes --]

On 03/03/2016 04:57 AM, Majd Dibbiny wrote:
> 
> On 17/2/2016 6:19 PM, Doug Ledford wrote:
>> On 02/14/2016 11:35 AM, Matan Barak wrote:
>>> From: Majd Dibbiny <majd-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
>>>
>>> Hi Doug,
>>>
>>> This series fixes two issues introduced in 4.5 after applying my
>>> series "Raw Packet QP user-space support for mlx5".
>>>
>>> SRQs don't use user-index, therefore the user shouldn't pass it and the
>>> kernel shouldn't verify. The first patch fixes this by avoiding
>>> user-index verification for non-xrc srqs.
>>>
>>> The mlx5_ib driver fails libraries that support user-index but don't
>>> pass it. It relies on the input length of the vendor specific part to
>>> determine whether the user-space supports user-index.
>>>
>>>
>>> In Legacy verbs, the given vendor specific part input length is given
>>> including struct ib_uverbs_cmd_hdr. In contrast, extended commands
>>> pass the same length exluding the header size.
>>> The vendor driver doesn't know whether the command is a legacy
>>> command or an extended command. Thus, we need to modify IB/core
>>> in order to pass a consistent size. The second patch fixes the input
>>> length in the IB/core and the wrong usage in the mlx5_ib.
>>>
>>> We verified that other vendors don't use the inlen parameter and thus
>>> won't break by this change.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Majd and Matan
>>>
>>>
>>> Majd Dibbiny (2):
>>>   IB/mlx5: Avoid using user-index for SRQs
>>>   IB/{core, mlx5}: Fix input len in vendor specific part of
>>>     create_qp/srq cmd
>>>
>>>  drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_cmd.c |  9 +++++---
>>>  drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/srq.c     | 41 +++++++++++++++++++-----------------
>>>  2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>>>
>> These went in already in case you missed it.  Thanks.
> Hi Doug,
> 
> I can't see those patches in your git repositories.
> Where were they applied to?

I *thought* they had went in via 4.5-rc already.  Upon double checking,
they weren't there, but I had marked them accepted in patchworks.  I
never mark them accepted until I download the patch files, and the patch
files for these two patches were no longer in my download directory.
That means either I applied them at one point and then they got removed
(probably by a git reset --hard HEAD~# to redo something before I pushed
it) or else simply never got applied when I thought they did.  In any
case, thanks for catching this.  I've added it to my k.o/for-4.5-rc
branch to go out later today to Linus.

-- 
Doug Ledford <dledford-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
              GPG KeyID: 0E572FDD



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 884 bytes --]