From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60286C55ABD for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 18:32:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E962422228 for ; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 18:32:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=nvidia.com header.i=@nvidia.com header.b="pKei1kbe" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726148AbgKLSc4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:32:56 -0500 Received: from nat-hk.nvidia.com ([203.18.50.4]:40962 "EHLO nat-hk.nvidia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726219AbgKLScz (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:32:55 -0500 Received: from HKMAIL103.nvidia.com (Not Verified[10.18.92.100]) by nat-hk.nvidia.com (using TLS: TLSv1.2, AES256-SHA) id ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 02:32:54 +0800 Received: from HKMAIL104.nvidia.com (10.18.16.13) by HKMAIL103.nvidia.com (10.18.16.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 18:32:50 +0000 Received: from NAM11-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (104.47.57.173) by HKMAIL104.nvidia.com (10.18.16.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 18:32:50 +0000 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=D60yyTziVlM5RBBZF7AR6ksplwKICLEhTpaLTpVFGSe454l7FtCPysXT7WyGsLDYpIyyr3QyPPDuDuOwkJRIC+bpBbBRq3dmt3CKykPSY5jimHWw1OzlTgP56oT8ox3Q51A+RQWb4llU3zla5K4N6Q6+IaV4NBrG/EMZ1Olb64dBGG/WjTiX6axrz68sg2eo6TGek/Q9OfK1p2FBjXa9EI6maRilcV69QmRggMXPkVfkbECn6d8Au8V79NVtkEkt/zJUDuwNSpkidIPJ0T02T7VKcH44/cO6SPQl6cm8MiquRFmXPOI8YPSNbPHwHmGcE7yU0DGsi/KRbdt4bUsZ5g== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=C8bEX51EmlVRYttfUEz6ToGWB1J+KgW9RvNupHxvneU=; b=S2fpRrDZI/F5tKBXkelPYWuUlQb7S2/jXBKhC1EQFNHVKQojKgAJdID1fCnPBsGsDL3qIYNYXGPcVcyoe+C85sVgtNww3ooYouxLmQfvsaUg6u93KslWZlgUBNgq3qkik6zASNSH+Um5epFzIEop7imlQYspIy2H+mr/DJ+RM7xiY6rHhuT28WiOMDPHFHozRghZU07y2qbLoVdmjyWL38XTwyl4RqBZvhcX13eNmHCQhIt4nLxYsLMh3dQWv5jaCGL7NUbJiCowFT6GI0l5q2fJqvXw0tLUOQUGdanJIjhLmEzTM+8122u8YF8mXAUwymR9mrVRK4j5ttFPbXRYRw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nvidia.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=nvidia.com; dkim=pass header.d=nvidia.com; arc=none Received: from DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:14a::12) by DM5PR12MB1753.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:3:10d::16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3541.21; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 18:32:47 +0000 Received: from DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::cdbe:f274:ad65:9a78]) by DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::cdbe:f274:ad65:9a78%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3499.032; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 18:32:47 +0000 Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 14:32:45 -0400 From: Jason Gunthorpe To: Weihang Li CC: , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH for-next 4/8] RDMA/hns: Add check for the validity of sl configuration in UD SQ WQE Message-ID: <20201112183245.GA963928@nvidia.com> References: <1604057975-23388-1-git-send-email-liweihang@huawei.com> <1604057975-23388-5-git-send-email-liweihang@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1604057975-23388-5-git-send-email-liweihang@huawei.com> X-ClientProxiedBy: MN2PR05CA0059.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:236::28) To DM6PR12MB3834.namprd12.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:14a::12) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1 Received: from mlx.ziepe.ca (156.34.48.30) by MN2PR05CA0059.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:236::28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3564.21 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 18:32:46 +0000 Received: from jgg by mlx with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1kdHOn-0042m8-Mv; Thu, 12 Nov 2020 14:32:45 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nvidia.com; s=n1; t=1605205974; bh=C8bEX51EmlVRYttfUEz6ToGWB1J+KgW9RvNupHxvneU=; h=ARC-Seal:ARC-Message-Signature:ARC-Authentication-Results:Date: From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:References:Content-Type: Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To:X-ClientProxiedBy:MIME-Version: X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType; b=pKei1kbeG+dXRZ/V1NsfUxoRReump0DWQ6YAA8DhOs0Svza9qmBlWSAkrk5/I6Rwz p7ZH7k/a2cgayFIREC1NkzQpbLhfxoobeOh0GcxuFHRjeJX5sBhglU4u56ZQgOgwaT AsNjSs14LNslNP9RNwdiQH3+hSsIx921Mlg06XeXV2edo94xIzOOWBSlvUqaV+8e+F G0CARFxpp/uAVCteQGbxnlMCVQ76hDeCZ/3dfatYDVGlkbBISqy/WFNx2KHjvoqWOZ a7JbnXQ2Bfa0jJAV5WJU/SLYMVUURRpwQ4/kObQ2RIMVU3jOtGlg5O7UH3ZTYStX9T ndANBgAayOOFg== Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 07:39:31PM +0800, Weihang Li wrote: > From: Jiaran Zhang > > According to the RoCE v1 specification, the sl (service level) 0-7 are > mapped directly to priorities 0-7 respectively, sl 8-15 are reserved. The > driver should verify whether the value of sl is larger than 7, if so, an > exception should be returned. > > Fixes: d6a3627e311c ("RDMA/hns: Optimize wqe buffer set flow for post send") > Signed-off-by: Jiaran Zhang > Signed-off-by: Weihang Li > drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c | 10 +++++++++- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c > index 7a1d30f..69386a5 100644 > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_hw_v2.c > @@ -427,9 +427,10 @@ static inline int set_ud_wqe(struct hns_roce_qp *qp, > void *wqe, unsigned int *sge_idx, > unsigned int owner_bit) > { > - struct hns_roce_dev *hr_dev = to_hr_dev(qp->ibqp.device); > struct hns_roce_ah *ah = to_hr_ah(ud_wr(wr)->ah); > struct hns_roce_v2_ud_send_wqe *ud_sq_wqe = wqe; > + struct ib_device *ib_dev = qp->ibqp.device; > + struct hns_roce_dev *hr_dev = to_hr_dev(ib_dev); > unsigned int curr_idx = *sge_idx; > int valid_num_sge; > u32 msg_len = 0; > @@ -489,6 +490,13 @@ static inline int set_ud_wqe(struct hns_roce_qp *qp, > V2_UD_SEND_WQE_BYTE_36_TCLASS_S, ah->av.tclass); > roce_set_field(ud_sq_wqe->byte_40, V2_UD_SEND_WQE_BYTE_40_FLOW_LABEL_M, > V2_UD_SEND_WQE_BYTE_40_FLOW_LABEL_S, ah->av.flowlabel); > + > + if (unlikely(ah->av.sl > MAX_SERVICE_LEVEL)) { > + ibdev_err(ib_dev, > + "failed to fill ud av, ud sl (%d) shouldn't be larger than %d.\n", > + ah->av.sl, MAX_SERVICE_LEVEL); > + return -EINVAL; > + } We should not print for things like this, IIRC userspace can cause the ah's sl to become set out of bounds Jason