From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] IB/uverbs: reject invalid or unknown opcodes Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 08:55:01 +0200 Message-ID: <20150824065501.GA31990@lst.de> References: <1440002254-795-1-git-send-email-hch@lst.de> <20150822082516.GC1857@lst.de> <55DABF1E.2050804@mellanox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55DABF1E.2050804-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Haggai Eran Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Sagi Grimberg , Doug Ledford , Sean Hefty , Hal Rosenstock , Eli Cohen , "linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "stable-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 09:52:14AM +0300, Haggai Eran wrote: > Okay. Maybe you can just add a case for IB_WR_SEND in this patch to > avoid hurting bisectability. I've done this already, just waiting for more feedback before resending: http://git.infradead.org/users/hch/rdma.git/commitdiff/20f34ca8ecac302984f3a92b9ad29f5f4b41780d > Looking at the uverbs part in patch 2, I think the changes are okay. I > noticed there's a (__be32 __force) cast of the immediate data from > userspace (it was already in the existing code). I wonder, why not > define the field in the uapi struct as __be32 in the first place? It looks odd to me as well, but it's not really something I want to change in this series. Note that sparse annoted types like __be32 aren't really common in userspace, but with a bit of effort they can be supported. We have them and regularly run sparse for xfsprogs for example. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html