On 1/19/23 13:18, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 12:05:07PM -0600, Bob Pearson wrote:
>> Correct errors in rxe_param.h caused by extending the range of
>> indices for MRs allowing it to overlap the range for MWs. Since
>> the driver determines whether an rkey is for an MR or MW by comparing
>> the index part of the rkey with these ranges this can cause an
>> MR to be incorrectly determined to be an MW.
>>
>> Additionally the parameters which determine the size of the index
>> ranges for MR, MW, QP and SRQ are incorrect since the actual
>> number of integers in the range [min, max] is (max - min + 1) not
>> (max - min).
>>
>> This patch corrects these errors.
>>
>> Fixes: 0994a1bcd5f7 ("RDMA/rxe: Bump up default maximum values used via uverbs")
>> Signed-off-by: Bob Pearson <rpearsonhpe@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/infiniband/sw/rxe/rxe_param.h | 27 +++++++++++++++++++--------
>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> This
>
> commit 1aefe5c177c1922119afb4ee443ddd6ac3140b37
> Author: Daisuke Matsuda <matsuda-daisuke@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue Dec 20 17:08:48 2022 +0900
>
> RDMA/rxe: Prevent faulty rkey generation
>
> If you create MRs more than 0x10000 times after loading the module,
> responder starts to reply NAKs for RDMA/Atomic operations because of rkey
> violation detected in check_rkey(). The root cause is that rkeys are
> incremented each time a new MR is created and the value overflows into the
> range reserved for MWs.
>
> This commit also increases the value of RXE_MAX_MW that has been limited
> unlike other parameters.
>
> Fixes: 0994a1bcd5f7 ("RDMA/rxe: Bump up default maximum values used via uverbs")
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221220080848.253785-2-matsuda-daisuke@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Daisuke Matsuda <matsuda-daisuke@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: Li Zhijian <lizhijian@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Li Zhijian <lizhijian@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> Is already in v6.2-rc and conflicts with this patch, it looks like it
> is doing the same thing, can you sort it out please?
>
> Thanks,
> Jason
Did this get lost? for-next is now at 6.2-rc3 now and the bug is still in rxe_param.h.
Bob
