From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 142C648C33; Fri, 5 Dec 2025 18:00:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A538B40268; Fri, 5 Dec 2025 18:00:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-wm1-f42.google.com (mail-wm1-f42.google.com [209.85.128.42]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC15440156 for ; Fri, 5 Dec 2025 18:00:10 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm1-f42.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-477a1c28778so32112865e9.3 for ; Fri, 05 Dec 2025 09:00:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1764954010; x=1765558810; darn=dpdk.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=hcgI2xWFfgO4YFo31UHaJDodyuP6Rws+OWHlL5TEFV4=; b=iyvV3ZFHGwjlCUPQGAvqwQ/BeMJ28VEzenP3Awe03IuG5RTUpTZFMYpDYSFm7QAMD3 LCA/CBr5OhCYyA9wcyWAuYQZHT4bkN/5VNLwi9GxhVM/FZJ+M+y1+CcUaLX5zcx1p+NH xphXCVpQHnamtAqgLywF9o74fwmAHDmGhl6oZpjh6kVhmKlBxtD+aeQJZM2DojWuWTQ+ PRIzRQz6VScXCq5g2wgD2Qb1eoqvGGf4KzMG4hkm8As8+HIneJtUfJQeaF3RKzheBYgB XWxtVEucLxnWzlS/NZW7KQJlDeIT5d4vBZWboUNt08y98tZdyqtMhbzd7CsbZ0MzECEm fvlw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1764954010; x=1765558810; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=hcgI2xWFfgO4YFo31UHaJDodyuP6Rws+OWHlL5TEFV4=; b=UMhDBrh/7J6joJE8nwM3x+6dAn/CWcdZWfb9MDMk0mZEbJ6VPNn6CSwN8cd4xoex4m DZYoNTMW8EbTXOgSWgPm2gTX/3quQ/QL/rjiCIhRKU9pxZKPZgZeUgk80ghuUl36mVMo b4WPYK9tu8xcystOWWPTuTdfDYnyAL/zs1v4IQ7OITnruVEthQ45lAPP/ddDyZlU0X3B ZtQay2cptzWhl5O/zb6lCfr5u/QKi3D0gjSRe6CXjTXwwk5bcB+xRjEPbVKG+Cm6I8nl c/ol8N6E6SzLBSSEnzTqHAX2sEr4Y7sGngNZF9zovtz/H1o5q9wLWd4Gb77fh6K9Pih/ p1NA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yyz3wz8x1/8ClcFINke+7+lDpMlKq4wT1qX6hiCv0p6VGS8wrIg 88dhFTgcTnz0873DJbQDy0VwhfMTcGE2JhVnFl1DQaLVXv3b2FbgqruiKPgs1sVCvrI= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncs5Jkhdn1821xH7RRfoqRDemQ8KrKJzMJFQ+T6enUU6aAHU/p66PN9w7cUUjPC +MMhety1v6bKt1/IfS1kfrSRTQUZGH9mj65LhO1i+QTZmmMCOCf3G6yPPDqqcw2/T2T6xQFP2CM 5aVf9smkWg5HX023VJWFt4V5aGeB49r0xFFDcTutlvonwCvxwkDNg36EP4D8UKl/Enog4EepwRJ z19kLFqPPFytSWVmYtarqovGRUShjAFI5QtiaO/ZqTo2Jg3AyBZtFEQjFsU8w5LwqMqwqpgVM1E Q8+JWnDmVOYHdhN26WA6CAPGHx6uAY1e+atlsKm/rTGykkn+CANUSHIVtwN4bGmeY40MTUkRj8v u1V6AwSe8poUjVzfgSZwRkuVDdCivawgkRzBpjT8YDznWdBR1BMCMJOb/1n77Hdw2gcKwddhbiO /3HnoVP6+R97pi2NBKzeYDZjuxm+ipZADwIb4K9wDtn5qt0Twj/fF9 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHc057sc4qZTJWZEFNrt6wOdfwNnATEsRgiWqvVVLtA3m8eF1Qx3I63nwzyxQVE8Gya4jDAnQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:46d0:b0:477:5c45:8100 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4792f39510fmr79908265e9.24.1764954009860; Fri, 05 Dec 2025 09:00:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from phoenix.local (204-195-96-226.wavecable.com. [204.195.96.226]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-4792afae44dsm74914105e9.0.2025.12.05.09.00.07 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 05 Dec 2025 09:00:09 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2025 09:00:03 -0800 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Bruce Richardson Cc: , Subject: Re: [RFC v2 02/14] test: avoid long hash names Message-ID: <20251205090003.5101a52b@phoenix.local> In-Reply-To: References: <20251202172626.283094-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20251205022948.327743-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20251205022948.327743-3-stephen@networkplumber.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On Fri, 5 Dec 2025 08:29:39 +0000 Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Thu, Dec 04, 2025 at 06:28:11PM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > The test was using hash table names which were too long and > > would break if the hash library was checking the parameters. > > > > Fixes: af75078fece3 ("first public release") > > Fixes: 9c7d8eed1a45 ("test/hash: add RCU tests") > > Fixes: 567bb951716f ("hash: reclaim RCU defer queue") > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger > > --- > > app/test/test_hash.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++---------- > > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/app/test/test_hash.c b/app/test/test_hash.c > > index 5791fd7f4c..8cecc28d11 100644 > > --- a/app/test/test_hash.c > > +++ b/app/test/test_hash.c > > @@ -1399,8 +1399,16 @@ static int test_hash_creation_with_bad_parameters(void) > > return -1; > > } > > > > - memcpy(¶ms, &ut_params, sizeof(params)); > > - params.name = "creation_with_bad_parameters_0"; > > + params = ut_params; > > + params.name = "really_long_name_of_22"; > > + handle = rte_hash_create(¶ms); > > + if (handle != NULL) { > > + rte_hash_free(handle); > > + printf("Impossible creating hash successfully with excessively long name\n"); > > + return -1; > > + } > > + > > I'm not sure about this behaviour, for something like the hash name. I'd > tend more towards having the hash library just truncate the name rather > than returning an error if it was too long. > > Also, I worry that this could break end-applications which were relying on > previous behaviour of ignoring long names. > > What do you/others think? Truncating the name could create issues where two hashes end up sharing a ring underneath.