Re: [PATCH v2] IB/mlx5: avoid excessive warning msgs when creating VFs on 2nd port

n", > + port_num + 1); > spin_unlock(>port[port_num].mp.mpi_lock); > return false; > } Reviewed-by: Daniel Jurgens

Re: [PATCH v2] IB/mlx5: avoid excessive warning msgs when creating VFs on 2nd port

n", > + port_num + 1); > spin_unlock(>port[port_num].mp.mpi_lock); > return false; > } Reviewed-by: Daniel Jurgens

Re: [PATCH] IB/mlx5: avoid binding a new mpi unit to the same devices repeatedly

On 7/23/2018 10:36 AM, Qing Huang wrote: > > Hi Daniel/Parav, > > Have you got a chance to review this patch? Thanks! Hi Qing, sorry for the delay, I just got back to the office today. I don't agree with the proposed fix, I provided an alternative suggestion below. > >>> Or. >>>

Re: [PATCH] IB/mlx5: avoid binding a new mpi unit to the same devices repeatedly

On 7/23/2018 10:36 AM, Qing Huang wrote: > > Hi Daniel/Parav, > > Have you got a chance to review this patch? Thanks! Hi Qing, sorry for the delay, I just got back to the office today. I don't agree with the proposed fix, I provided an alternative suggestion below. > >>> Or. >>>

Re: [PATCH] IB/mlx5: avoid binding a new mpi unit to the same devices repeatedly

On 7/14/2018 10:57 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote: > On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 2:50 AM, Qing Huang wrote: >> When a CX5 device is configured in dual-port RoCE mode, after creating >> many VFs against port 1, creating the same number of VFs against port 2 >> will flood kernel/syslog with something like >>

Re: [PATCH] IB/mlx5: avoid binding a new mpi unit to the same devices repeatedly

On 7/14/2018 10:57 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote: > On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 2:50 AM, Qing Huang wrote: >> When a CX5 device is configured in dual-port RoCE mode, after creating >> many VFs against port 1, creating the same number of VFs against port 2 >> will flood kernel/syslog with something like >>

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the selinux tree

On 5/22/2017 4:12 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 10:48 PM, Stephen Rothwell > wrote: >> Hi Paul, >> >> After merging the selinux tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc >> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this: >> >> drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_cmd.c: In

Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the selinux tree

On 5/22/2017 4:12 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 10:48 PM, Stephen Rothwell > wrote: >> Hi Paul, >> >> After merging the selinux tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc >> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this: >> >> drivers/infiniband/core/uverbs_cmd.c: In function 'create_qp': >>

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the selinux tree with Linus' tree

On 5/22/2017 4:08 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 10:38 PM, Stephen Rothwell > wrote: >> Hi Paul, >> >> Today's linux-next merge of the selinux tree got a conflict in: >> >> include/rdma/ib_verbs.h >> >> between commit: >> >> 2fc775726491 ("IB/opa-vnic:

Re: linux-next: manual merge of the selinux tree with Linus' tree

On 5/22/2017 4:08 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 10:38 PM, Stephen Rothwell > wrote: >> Hi Paul, >> >> Today's linux-next merge of the selinux tree got a conflict in: >> >> include/rdma/ib_verbs.h >> >> between commit: >> >> 2fc775726491 ("IB/opa-vnic: RDMA NETDEV

Re: [PATCH 1/3] selinux: Implement LSM notification system

On 4/26/2017 10:38 AM, Casey Schaufler wrote: > On 4/26/2017 8:02 AM, Sebastien Buisson wrote: >> From: Daniel Jurgens <dani...@mellanox.com> >> >> Add a generic notification mechanism in the LSM. Interested consumers >> can register a callback with the LSM

Re: [PATCH 1/3] selinux: Implement LSM notification system

On 4/26/2017 10:38 AM, Casey Schaufler wrote: > On 4/26/2017 8:02 AM, Sebastien Buisson wrote: >> From: Daniel Jurgens >> >> Add a generic notification mechanism in the LSM. Interested consumers >> can register a callback with the LSM and security modules c