On 3/7/2018 8:35 PM, Sabrina Dubroca wrote:
> 2018-03-06, 21:09:27 +0530, Atul Gupta wrote:
> [snip]
>> +static int chtls_set_tcb_field(struct sock *sk, u16 word, u64 mask, u64 val)
>> +{
>> + struct chtls_sock *csk = rcu_dereference_sk_user_data(sk);
>> + struct sk_buff *skb;
>> + struct cpl_set_tcb_field *req;
>> + struct ulptx_idata *sc;
>> + unsigned int wrlen = roundup(sizeof(*req) + sizeof(*sc), 16);
>> + unsigned int credits_needed = DIV_ROUND_UP(wrlen, 16);
>> +
>> + skb = alloc_skb(wrlen, GFP_ATOMIC);
> I haven't followed the whole call chain, but does this really need to
> be an atomic allocation?
this is used to send control info to HW, will look at it again for atomic usage
> Should this skb be charged to the socket's memory accounting?
>
>> + if (!skb)
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> + __set_tcb_field(sk, skb, word, mask, val, 0, 1);
>> + set_queue(skb, (csk->txq_idx << 1) | CPL_PRIORITY_DATA, sk);
>> + csk->wr_credits -= credits_needed;
>> + csk->wr_unacked += credits_needed;
>> + enqueue_wr(csk, skb);
>> + cxgb4_ofld_send(csk->egress_dev, skb);
> Should the return value be checked?
Yes, good to check
>
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>
> [snip]
>> +static void *chtls_alloc_mem(unsigned long size)
>> +{
>> + void *p = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
>> +
>> + if (!p)
>> + p = vmalloc(size);
>> + if (p)
>> + memset(p, 0, size);
>> + return p;
>> +}
> I think you replace this with kvzalloc().
taken care, thanks
>
>> +static void chtls_free_mem(void *addr)
>> +{
>> + unsigned long p = (unsigned long)addr;
>> +
>> + if (p >= VMALLOC_START && p < VMALLOC_END)
>> + vfree(addr);
>> + else
>> + kfree(addr);
>> +}
> Use kvfree().
done
>
>> +/* TLS Key bitmap processing */
>> +int chtls_init_kmap(struct chtls_dev *cdev, struct cxgb4_lld_info *lldi)
>> +{
>> + unsigned int num_key_ctx, bsize;
>> +
>> + num_key_ctx = (lldi->vr->key.size / TLS_KEY_CONTEXT_SZ);
>> + bsize = BITS_TO_LONGS(num_key_ctx);
>> +
>> + cdev->kmap.size = num_key_ctx;
>> + cdev->kmap.available = bsize;
>> + cdev->kmap.addr = chtls_alloc_mem(sizeof(*cdev->kmap.addr) *
>> + bsize);
>> + if (!cdev->kmap.addr)
>> + return -1;
> The return value of this function is never checked.
return not required, will revisit.
>
>> +
>> + cdev->kmap.start = lldi->vr->key.start;
>> + spin_lock_init(&cdev->kmap.lock);
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +void chtls_free_kmap(struct chtls_dev *cdev)
>> +{
>> + if (cdev->kmap.addr)
>> + chtls_free_mem(cdev->kmap.addr);
>> +}
> I think this wrapper function is not necessary.
removed
>
>> +static int get_new_keyid(struct chtls_sock *csk, u32 optname)
>> +{
>> + struct chtls_dev *cdev = csk->cdev;
>> + struct chtls_hws *hws = &csk->tlshws;
>> + struct net_device *dev = csk->egress_dev;
>> + struct adapter *adap = netdev2adap(dev);
>> + int keyid;
>> +
>> + spin_lock_bh(&cdev->kmap.lock);
>> + keyid = find_first_zero_bit(cdev->kmap.addr, cdev->kmap.size);
>> + if (keyid < cdev->kmap.size) {
>> + __set_bit(keyid, cdev->kmap.addr);
>> + if (optname == TLS_RX)
> TLS_RX only gets defined in patch 11, so the only reason you're not
> breaking the build is because all these new files aren't getting
> compiled until patch 12.
yes
>
>> + hws->rxkey = keyid;
>> + else
>> + hws->txkey = keyid;
>> + atomic_inc(&adap->chcr_stats.tls_key);
>> + } else {
>> + keyid = -1;
>> + }
>> + spin_unlock_bh(&cdev->kmap.lock);
>> + return keyid;
>> +}
>> +
> [snip]
>> +int chtls_setkey(struct chtls_sock *csk, u32 keylen, u32 optname)
>> +{
> ...
>> + skb = alloc_skb(len, GFP_KERNEL);
>> + if (!skb)
>> + return -ENOMEM;
> This return code is also ignored by its caller. Please review the
> whole patchset for that problem.
will do, thanks
>
> Same question as before, does this need to be accounted?
>
>
>> + /* ulptx command */
>> + kwr->req.cmd = cpu_to_be32(ULPTX_CMD_V(ULP_TX_MEM_WRITE) |
>> + T5_ULP_MEMIO_ORDER_V(1) |
>> + T5_ULP_MEMIO_IMM_V(1));
>> + kwr->req.len16 = cpu_to_be32((csk->tid << 8) |
>> + DIV_ROUND_UP(len - sizeof(kwr->wr), 16));
>> + kwr->req.dlen = cpu_to_be32(ULP_MEMIO_DATA_LEN_V(klen >> 5));
>> + kwr->req.lock_addr = cpu_to_be32(ULP_MEMIO_ADDR_V(keyid_to_addr
>> + (cdev->kmap.start, keyid)));
> Breaking this line in that way makes it really hard to read for
> humans.
I will clean this
Thanks
Atul
>
