From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
To: Asmaa Mnebhi <Asmaa@mellanox.com>
Cc: "minyard@acm.org" <minyard@acm.org>,
Vadim Pasternak <vadimp@mellanox.com>,
Michael Shych <michaelsh@mellanox.com>,
"rdunlap@infradead.org" <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/1] Add support for IPMB driver
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 22:13:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190603201325.GC2383@kunai> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <VI1PR05MB623971FF6F956A091840716DDA060@VI1PR05MB6239.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2708 bytes --]
Hi Asmaa,
sorry for the long wait. I missed this mail was still sitting in my
Drafts folder :(
> >> Am I overlooking something? Why are you protecting an atomic_read with a spinlock?
>
> A thread would lock the ipmb_dev->lock spinlock (above) for all the code below ONLY IF the atomic_read for the request_queue_len reports a value different from 0:
Well, not really. The spinlock is taken _before_ the atomic read. But
the read is atomic, so there should be no need. I am asking if the code
could look like this?
+ while (!atomic_read(&ipmb_dev->request_queue_len)) {
+ if (non_blocking)
+ return -EAGAIN;
+
+ res = wait_event_interruptible(ipmb_dev->wait_queue,
+ atomic_read(&ipmb_dev->request_queue_len));
+ if (res)
+ return res;
+ }
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&ipmb_dev->lock, flags);
+ if (list_empty(&ipmb_dev->request_queue)) {
> if (list_empty(&ipmb_dev->request_queue)) {
> 260 + dev_err(&ipmb_dev->client->dev, "request_queue is empty\n");
> 261 + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ipmb_dev->lock, flags);
The unlock operation could come before the dev_err. We don't need to
protect the printout and save time with the spinlock held.
> > + rq_sa = msg[RQ_SA_8BIT_IDX] >> 1;
> > + netf_rq_lun = msg[NETFN_LUN_IDX];
> > + /*
> > + * subtract rq_sa and netf_rq_lun from the length of the msg passed to
> > + * i2c_smbus_write_block_data_local
> > + */
> > + msg_len = msg[IPMB_MSG_LEN_IDX] - SMBUS_MSG_HEADER_LENGTH;
> > +
> > + strcpy(rq_client.name, "ipmb_requester");
> > + rq_client.adapter = ipmb_dev->client->adapter;
> > + rq_client.flags = ipmb_dev->client->flags;
> > + rq_client.addr = rq_sa;
>
> >> Is it possible to determine in a race-free way if rq_sa (which came
> >> from userspace AFAIU) is really the address from which the request
> >> came in (again if I understood all this correctly)?
> Yes there is. I see 2 options:
>
> 1) This is less explicit than option 2 but uses existing code and is
> simpler. we can use the ipmb_verify_checksum1 function since the IPMB
> response format is as follows:
> Byte 1: rq_sa
> Byte 2: netfunction/rqLUN
> Byte 3: checksum1
Hmmm, does that really prove that rq_sa is the same address the request
came from? Or does it only prove that the response packet is not
mangled?
> So if checksum1 is verified, it means rq_sa is correct.
>
> 2) I am not sure we want this but have a global variable which stores
> the address of the requester once the first request is received. We
> would compare that address with the one received from userspace in the
> code above.
Can there be only one requester in the system?
Thanks,
Wolfram
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-03 20:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-08 13:46 [PATCH v9 0/1] Add support for IPMB driver Asmaa Mnebhi
2019-05-08 13:46 ` [PATCH v9 1/1] " Asmaa Mnebhi
2019-05-19 14:02 ` Wolfram Sang
2019-05-20 14:50 ` Asmaa Mnebhi
2019-06-03 20:13 ` Wolfram Sang [this message]
2019-06-05 18:08 ` Asmaa Mnebhi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190603201325.GC2383@kunai \
--to=wsa@the-dreams.de \
--cc=Asmaa@mellanox.com \
--cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michaelsh@mellanox.com \
--cc=minyard@acm.org \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=vadimp@mellanox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).