From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH IB/core 2/2] IB/cm: Send authentic pkey in REQ msg and check eligibility of the pkeys Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 12:01:15 -0600 Message-ID: <20180516180115.GF25661@ziepe.ca> References: <3bee76df-49a6-cf3c-6df4-749a6309358e@dev.mellanox.co.il> <20180514210200.GN21531@ziepe.ca> <20180515190424.GL5615@ziepe.ca> <3E15B62F-E705-43BD-8A72-9E74F784D40E@oracle.com> <20180516151201.GA25661@ziepe.ca> <695ae613-931a-50ba-2b83-9d172e0ac2bc@dev.mellanox.co.il> <151B2A36-28F0-4A88-8633-31AE7E55F848@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <151B2A36-28F0-4A88-8633-31AE7E55F848@oracle.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: =?utf-8?B?SMOla29u?= Bugge Cc: Doug Ledford , Don Hiatt , Ira Weiny , Sean Hefty , OFED mailing list , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Hal Rosenstock List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 07:46:10PM +0200, HÃ¥kon Bugge wrote: > OK. Lets take one example. The pkey table contains 0xFFFF, 0x8001, > 0x0001. > > The wce.pkey_index is 1 (i.e., pointing to 0x8001). Now, tell me, was > BTH.PKey 0x8001 (matches 0x8001) or was it 0x0001 (also matching > 0x8001) ? As far as the Linux core is concerned, it must have been 0x8001, because the only way the pkey_index feature works properly is if exact-match takes precedence over in-exact match. Jason