From: "Pearson, Robert B" <rpearsonhpe@gmail.com>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
RDMA mailing list <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Bug Report] RDMA/core: test_qpex.py attempts invalid MW bind operation
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2021 11:46:13 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a430c9aa-80db-6c06-568f-3cd09b9f1a59@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YL8SbuEHsyioU/Ne@unreal>
On 6/8/2021 1:47 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 11:54:29PM -0500, Pearson, Robert B wrote:
>> On 6/7/2021 11:41 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 04:50:20PM -0500, Pearson, Robert B wrote:
>>>> sorry/this time without the HTML.
>>>>
>>>> ======================================================================
>>>> ERROR: test_qp_ex_rc_bind_mw (tests.test_qpex.QpExTestCase)
>>>> Verify bind memory window operation using the new post_send API.
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>>>> File "/home/rpearson/src/rdma-core/tests/test_qpex.py", line 292, in
>>>> test_qp_ex_rc_bind_mw
>>>> u.poll_cq(server.cq)
>>>> File "/home/rpearson/src/rdma-core/tests/utils.py", line 538, in poll_cq
>>>> raise PyverbsRDMAError('Completion status is {s}'.
>>>> pyverbs.pyverbs_error.PyverbsRDMAError: Completion status is Memory window
>>>> bind error. Errno: 6, No such device or address
>>>>
>>>> This test attempts to bind a type 2 MW to an MR that does not have bind mw
>>>> access set and expects the test to succeed.
>>> Does the test break after your MW series? Or will it break not-merged
>>> code yet?
>>>
>>> Generally speaking, we expect that developers run rdma-core tests and
>>> fixed/extend them prior to the submission.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>>> Bob Pearson
>> Nope. I don't have real RNICs at home to test. But (see my note to Zhu) the
>> non extended APIs do set the access flags correctly and the extended test
>> case does not. The wr_bind_mw() function can't fix this for the test case.
>> It has to set the access flags when it creates the MR and it didn't. It is
>> possible that mlx5 doesn't check the bind access flag but that seems
>> unlikely.
> mlx5 devices support MW 1 & 2 and kernel checks that only these types
> can be accepted from the user space. This is why mlx5 doesn't need to
> check access flags again.
>
> 903 static int ib_uverbs_alloc_mw(struct uverbs_attr_bundle *attrs)
> 904 {
>
> ....
>
> 927 if (cmd.mw_type != IB_MW_TYPE_1 && cmd.mw_type != IB_MW_TYPE_2) {
> 928 ret = -EINVAL;
> 929 goto err_put;
> 930 }
>
>
> Thanks
You check the type in alloc_mw but you only check the MR access flags if
MW_DEBUG is set which is not by default. So you would fail a negative
test which we sort of currently have. The second bug in the test which
we found this morning is not correctly setting the op flags in the
create_qp_ex call. According to the man page only the extended
operations set in the op flags are 'implemented' for that QP. Apparently
mlx5 goes ahead and populates them. Makes more sense to me since the API
as described is kind of overwrought and dumb.
Bob
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-08 16:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-07 21:50 [Bug Report] RDMA/core: test_qpex.py attempts invalid MW bind operation Pearson, Robert B
2021-06-08 4:41 ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-06-08 4:54 ` Pearson, Robert B
2021-06-08 6:47 ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-06-08 11:53 ` Edward Srouji
2021-06-08 15:54 ` Pearson, Robert B
2021-06-08 16:10 ` Edward Srouji
2021-06-08 16:12 ` Pearson, Robert B
2021-06-08 16:22 ` Pearson, Robert B
2021-06-08 17:14 ` Edward Srouji
2021-06-08 17:36 ` Pearson, Robert B
2021-06-08 16:46 ` Pearson, Robert B [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=a430c9aa-80db-6c06-568f-3cd09b9f1a59@gmail.com \
--to=rpearsonhpe@gmail.com \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=leon@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.