* [PATCH] RDMA/rxe: Use correct ATOMIC Acknowledge opcode in BTH
@ 2022-07-05 15:57 Xiao Yang
2022-07-06 11:48 ` yangx.jy
2022-07-14 15:55 ` Bob Pearson
0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Xiao Yang @ 2022-07-05 15:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-rdma; +Cc: leon, jgg, rpearsonhpe, zyjzyj2000, Xiao Yang
When responder processed an Atomic requeset and got a NAK,
the opcode field in BTH should be ATOMIC Acknowledge instead
of Acknowledge.
Signed-off-by: Xiao Yang <yangx.jy@fujitsu.com>
---
drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_resp.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_resp.c b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_resp.c
index 265e46fe050f..592d73c37d48 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_resp.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_resp.c
@@ -1080,10 +1080,10 @@ static enum resp_states acknowledge(struct rxe_qp *qp,
if (qp_type(qp) != IB_QPT_RC)
return RESPST_CLEANUP;
- if (qp->resp.aeth_syndrome != AETH_ACK_UNLIMITED)
+ if (pkt->mask & RXE_ATOMIC_MASK)
+ send_atomic_ack(qp, qp->resp.aeth_syndrome, pkt->psn);
+ else if (qp->resp.aeth_syndrome != AETH_ACK_UNLIMITED)
send_ack(qp, qp->resp.aeth_syndrome, pkt->psn);
- else if (pkt->mask & RXE_ATOMIC_MASK)
- send_atomic_ack(qp, AETH_ACK_UNLIMITED, pkt->psn);
else if (bth_ack(pkt))
send_ack(qp, AETH_ACK_UNLIMITED, pkt->psn);
--
2.34.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] RDMA/rxe: Use correct ATOMIC Acknowledge opcode in BTH
2022-07-05 15:57 [PATCH] RDMA/rxe: Use correct ATOMIC Acknowledge opcode in BTH Xiao Yang
@ 2022-07-06 11:48 ` yangx.jy
2022-07-14 15:55 ` Bob Pearson
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: yangx.jy @ 2022-07-06 11:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org
Cc: leon@kernel.org, jgg@ziepe.ca, rpearsonhpe@gmail.com,
zyjzyj2000@gmail.com
On 2022/7/5 23:57, Xiao Yang wrote:
> When responder processed an Atomic requeset and got a NAK,
> the opcode field in BTH should be ATOMIC Acknowledge instead
> of Acknowledge.
Hi,
Sorry, please ignore the wrong patch because it will lead to a kernel panic.
Best Regards,
Xiao Yang
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiao Yang <yangx.jy@fujitsu.com>
> ---
> drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_resp.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_resp.c b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_resp.c
> index 265e46fe050f..592d73c37d48 100644
> --- a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_resp.c
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_resp.c
> @@ -1080,10 +1080,10 @@ static enum resp_states acknowledge(struct rxe_qp *qp,
> if (qp_type(qp) != IB_QPT_RC)
> return RESPST_CLEANUP;
>
> - if (qp->resp.aeth_syndrome != AETH_ACK_UNLIMITED)
> + if (pkt->mask & RXE_ATOMIC_MASK)
> + send_atomic_ack(qp, qp->resp.aeth_syndrome, pkt->psn);
> + else if (qp->resp.aeth_syndrome != AETH_ACK_UNLIMITED)
> send_ack(qp, qp->resp.aeth_syndrome, pkt->psn);
> - else if (pkt->mask & RXE_ATOMIC_MASK)
> - send_atomic_ack(qp, AETH_ACK_UNLIMITED, pkt->psn);
> else if (bth_ack(pkt))
> send_ack(qp, AETH_ACK_UNLIMITED, pkt->psn);
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] RDMA/rxe: Use correct ATOMIC Acknowledge opcode in BTH
2022-07-05 15:57 [PATCH] RDMA/rxe: Use correct ATOMIC Acknowledge opcode in BTH Xiao Yang
2022-07-06 11:48 ` yangx.jy
@ 2022-07-14 15:55 ` Bob Pearson
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Bob Pearson @ 2022-07-14 15:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xiao Yang, linux-rdma; +Cc: leon, jgg, zyjzyj2000
On 7/5/22 10:57, Xiao Yang wrote:
> When responder processed an Atomic requeset and got a NAK,
> the opcode field in BTH should be ATOMIC Acknowledge instead
> of Acknowledge.
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiao Yang <yangx.jy@fujitsu.com>
> ---
> drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_resp.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_resp.c b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_resp.c
> index 265e46fe050f..592d73c37d48 100644
> --- a/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_resp.c
> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_resp.c
> @@ -1080,10 +1080,10 @@ static enum resp_states acknowledge(struct rxe_qp *qp,
> if (qp_type(qp) != IB_QPT_RC)
> return RESPST_CLEANUP;
>
> - if (qp->resp.aeth_syndrome != AETH_ACK_UNLIMITED)
> + if (pkt->mask & RXE_ATOMIC_MASK)
> + send_atomic_ack(qp, qp->resp.aeth_syndrome, pkt->psn);
> + else if (qp->resp.aeth_syndrome != AETH_ACK_UNLIMITED)
> send_ack(qp, qp->resp.aeth_syndrome, pkt->psn);
> - else if (pkt->mask & RXE_ATOMIC_MASK)
> - send_atomic_ack(qp, AETH_ACK_UNLIMITED, pkt->psn);
> else if (bth_ack(pkt))
> send_ack(qp, AETH_ACK_UNLIMITED, pkt->psn);
>
Xaio,
Just saw this. The difference between the two opcodes tells if there is an
AtomicAckETH present. If the operation fails there is no data to send back
so there is only an AETH in the reply packet and Acknowledge is the correct
opcode. When the packet is parsed if you use AtomicAcknowledge for a failed
atomic operation you will get the wrong offsets when you lookup the header
offsets in rxe_opcode[] which not surprisingly leads to problems.
Bob
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-07-14 15:55 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-07-05 15:57 [PATCH] RDMA/rxe: Use correct ATOMIC Acknowledge opcode in BTH Xiao Yang
2022-07-06 11:48 ` yangx.jy
2022-07-14 15:55 ` Bob Pearson
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox