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 0CD3642C50; Sun, 11 Jun 2023 00:50:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E60C400D5; Sun, 11 Jun 2023 00:50:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C7704003C for ; Sun, 11 Jun 2023 00:50:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 938A85C00C4; Sat, 10 Jun 2023 18:50:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 10 Jun 2023 18:50:40 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t= 1686437440; x=1686523840; bh=Glqw4L8O7eRhS7zEfnmz+5gHfAUDqPTjVKE guGrZ6Ew=; b=N64ncme5QcDO9gs0KLQ3LfF5B63UYf4Iyqd32+/hHhKRw/yG2/+ jaQZrn0UpgwSMHE7VX2XSuTtnY3/jBsY88I+h45ZZ6EDsI/i2tTKLCP6xOvxrzIe 8pvHbIUQphKOxiowSebjfPFMnGu0HfsMkJSXgXFQc4VLZcE11BcmEDW35K8yP50d 00YgUpvHagmU5zO/i5XJ/mK/Sg1UsvSgk0Ae7FPQvt6AWtF1k5UKMMBIxA6+NLFO H3gNPPxzWi3fc8Ssmszm2Ubd8+vs5VlYqAD545aBmDpukEOiMVJ23b0v5rjN1v3Z mbKhauMG5Xm4wsvThKDqa+vhTBz/TPh3hQg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t= 1686437440; x=1686523840; bh=Glqw4L8O7eRhS7zEfnmz+5gHfAUDqPTjVKE guGrZ6Ew=; b=vGJi7+ulUQ6ELLCfOt/q/nmcH8bYCs2fYOBZm1RV7BH7+w+vCvU zvheyjMD66vSOQTtPFsq84as/UkIq6rEtRzJWXSWazFJHeSDpuvXGn36+vE1LPiY ncwY+57odJBuzUfCoQ/vszGNoltw6x4PlK71KHcm2Ku5XrQQ6yoeJM6BzUXNtdKt aEvOW3RBS1bs+RhGy/w9RANiRn2XLMO57lfYXA87l+NmZcvH3m/DZKSxhHMl9ibr QivMhyWdBcsGvHYgX/4s4GY/Z9v7UShACD2SLEEMY+dUJjjR5OlQ/VZHXHU/Ms2b ctzpf5Uf0nJpw0pWsEwsbH6tRbQ2KrlqFqg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedrgeduuddguddvucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvvefufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedtjeeiieefhedtfffgvdelteeufeefheeujefgueetfedttdei kefgkeduhedtgfenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfh hrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Sat, 10 Jun 2023 18:50:38 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Akhil Goyal , Kiran Kumar K , Volodymyr Fialko , Anoob Joseph Cc: Jerin Jacob , Konstantin Ananyev , dev@dpdk.org, Hemant Agrawal , Mattias =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=F6nnblom?= , dev@dpdk.org, Olivier Matz , Stephen Hemminger , david.marchand@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 06/21] pdcp: add pre and post process for UL Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2023 00:50:35 +0200 Message-ID: <2632776.BddDVKsqQX@thomas> In-Reply-To: <20230530100158.1428-7-anoobj@marvell.com> References: <20230527085910.972-1-anoobj@marvell.com> <20230530100158.1428-1-anoobj@marvell.com> <20230530100158.1428-7-anoobj@marvell.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 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 Hello, I'm sorry to inform you that I see a compilation failure when cross-compiling for PPC64: err_mb is seen as potentially unitialized when calling rte_memcpy(). 30/05/2023 12:01, Anoob Joseph: > +static uint16_t > +pdcp_post_process_ul(const struct rte_pdcp_entity *entity, > + struct rte_mbuf *in_mb[], struct rte_mbuf *out_mb[], > + uint16_t num, uint16_t *nb_err_ret) > +{ > + struct entity_priv *en_priv = entity_priv_get(entity); > + const uint32_t hdr_trim_sz = en_priv->aad_sz; > + int i, nb_success = 0, nb_err = 0; > + struct rte_mbuf *mb, *err_mb[num]; > + I need to add a workaround here to make GCC happy: #ifdef RTE_ARCH_PPC_64 err_mb[0] = NULL; /* workaround PPC-GCC bug */ #endif > + for (i = 0; i < num; i++) { > + mb = in_mb[i]; > + if (unlikely(mb->ol_flags & RTE_MBUF_F_RX_SEC_OFFLOAD_FAILED)) { > + err_mb[nb_err++] = mb; > + continue; > + } > + > + if (hdr_trim_sz) > + rte_pktmbuf_adj(mb, hdr_trim_sz); > + > + out_mb[nb_success++] = mb; > + } > + > + if (unlikely(nb_err != 0)) > + rte_memcpy(&out_mb[nb_success], err_mb, nb_err * sizeof(struct rte_mbuf *)); > + > + *nb_err_ret = nb_err; > + return nb_success; > +} I've added the workaround in 3 places while pulling next-crypto tree. Feel free to improve it with a new patch, thanks.