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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01C65C07545 for ; Wed, 25 Oct 2023 13:00:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1344332AbjJYNAt (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Oct 2023 09:00:49 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55570 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1344354AbjJYNAp (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Oct 2023 09:00:45 -0400 Received: from out30-119.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-119.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.119]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0ED3B9F for ; Wed, 25 Oct 2023 06:00:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Alimail-AntiSpam: AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R181e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;DS=||;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=ay29a033018046059;MF=guangguan.wang@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=8;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0Vuul-qK_1698238834; Received: from 30.221.101.240(mailfrom:guangguan.wang@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0Vuul-qK_1698238834) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com; Wed, 25 Oct 2023 21:00:35 +0800 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2023 21:00:33 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.5 159/241] net/smc: support smc release version negotiation in clc handshake Content-Language: en-US To: Greg Kroah-Hartman , huangjie.albert@bytedance.com Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev, Tony Lu , Jan Karcher , "David S. Miller" , Sasha Levin References: <20231023104833.832874523@linuxfoundation.org> <20231023104837.750719920@linuxfoundation.org> <80669f40-3bc5-440e-9440-e153d12e37ef@linux.alibaba.com> <2023102521-undated-edition-d501@gregkh> From: Guangguan Wang In-Reply-To: <2023102521-undated-edition-d501@gregkh> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org On 2023/10/25 18:08, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 08:05:01PM +0800, Guangguan Wang wrote: >> Hi, Greg. >> >> [PATCH 6.5 159/241] net/smc: support smc release version negotiation in clc handshake >> [PATCH 6.5 160/241] net/smc: support smc v2.x features validate >> >> The above two patches should not backport to stable tree 6.5, which may result in unexpected >> fallback if communication between 6.6 and 6.5(with these two patch) via SMC-R v2.1. The above >> two patches should not exist individually without the patch 7f0620b9(net/smc: support max >> connections per lgr negotiation) and the patch 69b888e3(net/smc: support max links per lgr >> negotiation in clc handshake). >> >> The patch c68681ae46ea ("net/smc: fix smc clc failed issue when netdevice not in init_net") >> does not rely the feature SMC-R v2.1. But I think it may have conflict here when backport >> to stable tree 6.5: >> >> @@ -1201,6 +1201,7 @@ static int smc_connect_rdma_v2_prepare(struct smc_sock *smc, >> (struct smc_clc_msg_accept_confirm_v2 *)aclc; >> struct smc_clc_first_contact_ext *fce = >> smc_get_clc_first_contact_ext(clc_v2, false); --conflict here >> + struct net *net = sock_net(&smc->sk); >> >> >> I think it is better to resolve the confilict rather than backport more patches. >> The resolution of the conflict should be like: >> >> @@ -1201,6 +1201,7 @@ static int smc_connect_rdma_v2_prepare(struct smc_sock *smc, >> (struct smc_clc_msg_accept_confirm_v2 *)aclc; >> struct smc_clc_first_contact_ext *fce = >> (struct smc_clc_first_contact_ext *) >> (((u8 *)clc_v2) + sizeof(*clc_v2)); --replace the line smc_get_clc_first_contact_ext(clc_v2, false); >> + struct net *net = sock_net(&smc->sk); > > Thanks for letting me know. > > I've dropped this patch entirely from the 6.5.y queue now (and the > follow-on ones.) Can you send a backported, and tested, set of patches > to us for inclusion if you want this fixed up in the 6.5.y tree? That > way we make sure to get this done properly. > > thanks, > > greg k-h I think it is more appropriate for Albert Huang, who is the author of the patch("net/smc: fix smc clc failed issue when netdevice not in init_net"), to do this because he knows the background of the fix and how to test it. Thanks, Guangguan Wang