On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Yann Droneaud <ydroneaud@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> --- a/include/uapi/rdma/ib_user_verbs.h
>> +++ b/include/uapi/rdma/ib_user_verbs.h
>> @@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ struct ib_uverbs_create_qp {
>> __u8 sq_sig_all;
>> __u8 qp_type;
>> __u8 is_srq;
>> - __u8 reserved;
>> + __u8 create_flags;
>> __u64 driver_data[0];
>> };
>>
>
> I'm not really happy with the way "reserved" field is used by this
> patch: as the field wasn't check for being set to 0, any value could be
> given by userspace (imagine the structure lay on stack). Using it now
> could be dangerous. It must be double checked.
We are only allowing user space applications to program certain
aspects in the behavior
of their own QPs, no risk to the system/kernel state.
We've done it very successfully in the past with adding the link_layer field
to struct ib_uverbs_query_port_resp as part of the RoCE story instead of a
reserved field.
Or
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
