DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test/timer: fix memzone reserve failure check
@ 2021-04-22  9:18 Min Hu (Connor)
  2021-05-01 20:00 ` Carrillo, Erik G
                   ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Min Hu (Connor) @ 2021-04-22  9:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dev; +Cc: ferruh.yigit, rsanford, erik.g.carrillo

Segmentation fault may occur without checking if memzone
reserves succeed or not.

This patch fixed it.

Fixes: 50247fe03fe0 ("test/timer: exercise new APIs in secondary process")
Cc: stable@dpdk.org

Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
---
 app/test/test_timer_secondary.c | 10 ++++++++++
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)

diff --git a/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c b/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c
index 1e8f1d4..281f5bd 100644
--- a/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c
+++ b/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c
@@ -125,6 +125,11 @@ test_timer_secondary(void)
 
 		mz = rte_memzone_reserve(TEST_INFO_MZ_NAME, sizeof(*test_info),
 					 SOCKET_ID_ANY, 0);
+		if (mz == NULL) {
+			printf("Failed to reserve memzone\n");
+			return TEST_SKIPPED;
+		}
+
 		test_info = mz->addr;
 		TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test_info, "Couldn't allocate memory for "
 				     "test data");
@@ -171,6 +176,11 @@ test_timer_secondary(void)
 		int i;
 
 		mz = rte_memzone_lookup(TEST_INFO_MZ_NAME);
+		if (mz == NULL) {
+			printf("Failed to lookup memzone\n");
+			return TEST_SKIPPED;
+		}
+
 		test_info = mz->addr;
 		TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test_info, "Couldn't lookup memzone for "
 				     "test info");
-- 
2.7.4


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test/timer: fix memzone reserve failure check
  2021-04-22  9:18 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test/timer: fix memzone reserve failure check Min Hu (Connor)
@ 2021-05-01 20:00 ` Carrillo, Erik G
  2021-05-04  1:08   ` Min Hu (Connor)
  2021-05-04  1:07 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Min Hu (Connor)
  2021-05-11  0:53 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Min Hu (Connor)
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Carrillo, Erik G @ 2021-05-01 20:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Min Hu (Connor), dev; +Cc: Yigit, Ferruh, rsanford

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 4:19 AM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>; rsanford@akamai.com; Carrillo,
> Erik G <erik.g.carrillo@intel.com>
> Subject: [PATCH] test/timer: fix memzone reserve failure check
> 
> Segmentation fault may occur without checking if memzone reserves
> succeed or not.
> 
> This patch fixed it.
> 
> Fixes: 50247fe03fe0 ("test/timer: exercise new APIs in secondary process")
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> 
> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
> ---
>  app/test/test_timer_secondary.c | 10 ++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c
> b/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c index 1e8f1d4..281f5bd 100644
> --- a/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c
> +++ b/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c
> @@ -125,6 +125,11 @@ test_timer_secondary(void)
> 
>  		mz = rte_memzone_reserve(TEST_INFO_MZ_NAME,
> sizeof(*test_info),
>  					 SOCKET_ID_ANY, 0);
> +		if (mz == NULL) {
> +			printf("Failed to reserve memzone\n");
> +			return TEST_SKIPPED;
> +		}
> +
>  		test_info = mz->addr;
>  		TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test_info, "Couldn't allocate
> memory for "
>  				     "test data");

I think the TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL check here should be the area we update -- instead of checking the test_info pointer, we should check "mz", and that will address the issue you have noted.  We can then move the "test_info = mz->addr" assignment below the assert.

> @@ -171,6 +176,11 @@ test_timer_secondary(void)
>  		int i;
> 
>  		mz = rte_memzone_lookup(TEST_INFO_MZ_NAME);
> +		if (mz == NULL) {
> +			printf("Failed to lookup memzone\n");
> +			return TEST_SKIPPED;
> +		}
> +
>  		test_info = mz->addr;
>  		TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test_info, "Couldn't lookup
> memzone for "
>  				     "test info");

Same thing here -- we can update the TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL call here instead, and move it above the "test_info = mz->addr" assignment.

Thanks,
Erik

> --
> 2.7.4


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] test/timer: fix memzone reserve failure check
  2021-04-22  9:18 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test/timer: fix memzone reserve failure check Min Hu (Connor)
  2021-05-01 20:00 ` Carrillo, Erik G
@ 2021-05-04  1:07 ` Min Hu (Connor)
  2021-05-04  1:18   ` Carrillo, Erik G
  2021-05-10 14:13   ` Thomas Monjalon
  2021-05-11  0:53 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Min Hu (Connor)
  2 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Min Hu (Connor) @ 2021-05-04  1:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dev; +Cc: ferruh.yigit, erik.g.carrillo, rsanford

Segmentation fault may occur without checking if memzone
reserves succeed or not.

This patch fixed it.

Fixes: 50247fe03fe0 ("test/timer: exercise new APIs in secondary process")
Cc: stable@dpdk.org

Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
---
v2:
* use TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL check "mz" instead of checking
  the test_info pointer.
---
 app/test/test_timer_secondary.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c b/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c
index 1e8f1d4..16a9f18 100644
--- a/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c
+++ b/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c
@@ -125,9 +125,9 @@ test_timer_secondary(void)
 
 		mz = rte_memzone_reserve(TEST_INFO_MZ_NAME, sizeof(*test_info),
 					 SOCKET_ID_ANY, 0);
-		test_info = mz->addr;
-		TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test_info, "Couldn't allocate memory for "
+		TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(mz, "Couldn't allocate memory for "
 				     "test data");
+		test_info = mz->addr;
 
 		test_info->tim_mempool = rte_mempool_create("test_timer_mp",
 				NUM_TIMERS, sizeof(struct rte_timer), 0, 0,
@@ -171,9 +171,9 @@ test_timer_secondary(void)
 		int i;
 
 		mz = rte_memzone_lookup(TEST_INFO_MZ_NAME);
-		test_info = mz->addr;
-		TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test_info, "Couldn't lookup memzone for "
+		TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(mz, "Couldn't lookup memzone for "
 				     "test info");
+		test_info = mz->addr;
 
 		for (i = 0; i < NUM_TIMERS; i++) {
 			rte_mempool_get(test_info->tim_mempool, (void **)&tim);
-- 
2.7.4


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test/timer: fix memzone reserve failure check
  2021-05-01 20:00 ` Carrillo, Erik G
@ 2021-05-04  1:08   ` Min Hu (Connor)
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Min Hu (Connor) @ 2021-05-04  1:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Carrillo, Erik G, dev; +Cc: Yigit, Ferruh, rsanford



在 2021/5/2 4:00, Carrillo, Erik G 写道:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 4:19 AM
>> To: dev@dpdk.org
>> Cc: Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>; rsanford@akamai.com; Carrillo,
>> Erik G <erik.g.carrillo@intel.com>
>> Subject: [PATCH] test/timer: fix memzone reserve failure check
>>
>> Segmentation fault may occur without checking if memzone reserves
>> succeed or not.
>>
>> This patch fixed it.
>>
>> Fixes: 50247fe03fe0 ("test/timer: exercise new APIs in secondary process")
>> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
>> ---
>>   app/test/test_timer_secondary.c | 10 ++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c
>> b/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c index 1e8f1d4..281f5bd 100644
>> --- a/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c
>> +++ b/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c
>> @@ -125,6 +125,11 @@ test_timer_secondary(void)
>>
>>   		mz = rte_memzone_reserve(TEST_INFO_MZ_NAME,
>> sizeof(*test_info),
>>   					 SOCKET_ID_ANY, 0);
>> +		if (mz == NULL) {
>> +			printf("Failed to reserve memzone\n");
>> +			return TEST_SKIPPED;
>> +		}
>> +
>>   		test_info = mz->addr;
>>   		TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test_info, "Couldn't allocate
>> memory for "
>>   				     "test data");
> 
> I think the TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL check here should be the area we update -- instead of checking the test_info pointer, we should check "mz", and that will address the issue you have noted.  We can then move the "test_info = mz->addr" assignment below the assert.
> 
Agreed, fixed in v2, thanks.
>> @@ -171,6 +176,11 @@ test_timer_secondary(void)
>>   		int i;
>>
>>   		mz = rte_memzone_lookup(TEST_INFO_MZ_NAME);
>> +		if (mz == NULL) {
>> +			printf("Failed to lookup memzone\n");
>> +			return TEST_SKIPPED;
>> +		}
>> +
>>   		test_info = mz->addr;
>>   		TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test_info, "Couldn't lookup
>> memzone for "
>>   				     "test info");
> 
> Same thing here -- we can update the TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL call here instead, and move it above the "test_info = mz->addr" assignment.
> 
Fixed in v2, thanks.
> Thanks,
> Erik
> 
>> --
>> 2.7.4
> 
> .
> 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] test/timer: fix memzone reserve failure check
  2021-05-04  1:07 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Min Hu (Connor)
@ 2021-05-04  1:18   ` Carrillo, Erik G
  2021-05-10 14:13   ` Thomas Monjalon
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Carrillo, Erik G @ 2021-05-04  1:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Min Hu (Connor), dev; +Cc: Yigit, Ferruh, rsanford

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
> Sent: Monday, May 3, 2021 8:08 PM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>; Carrillo, Erik G
> <erik.g.carrillo@intel.com>; rsanford@akamai.com
> Subject: [PATCH v2] test/timer: fix memzone reserve failure check
> 
> Segmentation fault may occur without checking if memzone reserves
> succeed or not.
> 
> This patch fixed it.
> 
> Fixes: 50247fe03fe0 ("test/timer: exercise new APIs in secondary process")
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> 
> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
> ---
> v2:
> * use TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL check "mz" instead of checking
>   the test_info pointer.
> ---

Thanks,

Acked-by: Erik Gabriel Carrillo <erik.g.carrillo@intel.com>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] test/timer: fix memzone reserve failure check
  2021-05-04  1:07 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Min Hu (Connor)
  2021-05-04  1:18   ` Carrillo, Erik G
@ 2021-05-10 14:13   ` Thomas Monjalon
  2021-05-11  0:53     ` Min Hu (Connor)
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2021-05-10 14:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Min Hu (Connor); +Cc: dev, ferruh.yigit, erik.g.carrillo, rsanford

04/05/2021 03:07, Min Hu (Connor):
> Segmentation fault may occur without checking if memzone
> reserves succeed or not.

The sentence is confusing. Please try to make it more logical.
Something like "It was potentially dereferencing a null pointer.
It is fixed by checking the pointer before dereferencing."

> 
> This patch fixed it.
> 
> Fixes: 50247fe03fe0 ("test/timer: exercise new APIs in secondary process")
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> 
> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
[...]
> -		test_info = mz->addr;
> -		TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test_info, "Couldn't allocate memory for "
> +		TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(mz, "Couldn't allocate memory for "
>  				     "test data");

Error messages should not be split. I makes search difficult.
Please fix it in this patch while touching this line.




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] test/timer: fix memzone reserve failure check
  2021-04-22  9:18 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test/timer: fix memzone reserve failure check Min Hu (Connor)
  2021-05-01 20:00 ` Carrillo, Erik G
  2021-05-04  1:07 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Min Hu (Connor)
@ 2021-05-11  0:53 ` Min Hu (Connor)
  2021-05-12 14:36   ` Thomas Monjalon
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Min Hu (Connor) @ 2021-05-11  0:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dev; +Cc: ferruh.yigit, thomas, erik.g.carrillo, rsanford

Segmentation fault may occur without checking if memzone
reserves succeed or not.

This patch fixed it.

Fixes: 50247fe03fe0 ("test/timer: exercise new APIs in secondary process")
Cc: stable@dpdk.org

Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
---
v3:
* do not split error messages.

v2:
* use TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL check "mz" instead of checking
  the test_info pointer.
---
 app/test/test_timer_secondary.c | 6 ++----
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c b/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c
index 1e8f1d4..decfaef 100644
--- a/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c
+++ b/app/test/test_timer_secondary.c
@@ -125,9 +125,8 @@ test_timer_secondary(void)
 
 		mz = rte_memzone_reserve(TEST_INFO_MZ_NAME, sizeof(*test_info),
 					 SOCKET_ID_ANY, 0);
+		TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(mz, "Couldn't allocate memory for test data");
 		test_info = mz->addr;
-		TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test_info, "Couldn't allocate memory for "
-				     "test data");
 
 		test_info->tim_mempool = rte_mempool_create("test_timer_mp",
 				NUM_TIMERS, sizeof(struct rte_timer), 0, 0,
@@ -171,9 +170,8 @@ test_timer_secondary(void)
 		int i;
 
 		mz = rte_memzone_lookup(TEST_INFO_MZ_NAME);
+		TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(mz, "Couldn't lookup memzone for test info");
 		test_info = mz->addr;
-		TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test_info, "Couldn't lookup memzone for "
-				     "test info");
 
 		for (i = 0; i < NUM_TIMERS; i++) {
 			rte_mempool_get(test_info->tim_mempool, (void **)&tim);
-- 
2.7.4


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] test/timer: fix memzone reserve failure check
  2021-05-10 14:13   ` Thomas Monjalon
@ 2021-05-11  0:53     ` Min Hu (Connor)
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Min Hu (Connor) @ 2021-05-11  0:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Thomas Monjalon; +Cc: dev, ferruh.yigit, erik.g.carrillo, rsanford



在 2021/5/10 22:13, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
> 04/05/2021 03:07, Min Hu (Connor):
>> Segmentation fault may occur without checking if memzone
>> reserves succeed or not.
> 
> The sentence is confusing. Please try to make it more logical.
> Something like "It was potentially dereferencing a null pointer.
> It is fixed by checking the pointer before dereferencing."
> 
>>
>> This patch fixed it.
>>
>> Fixes: 50247fe03fe0 ("test/timer: exercise new APIs in secondary process")
>> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
> [...]
>> -		test_info = mz->addr;
>> -		TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(test_info, "Couldn't allocate memory for "
>> +		TEST_ASSERT_NOT_NULL(mz, "Couldn't allocate memory for "
>>   				     "test data");
> 
> Error messages should not be split. I makes search difficult.
> Please fix it in this patch while touching this line.
> 
Fixed in v3, thanks.
> 
> 
> .
> 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] test/timer: fix memzone reserve failure check
  2021-05-11  0:53 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Min Hu (Connor)
@ 2021-05-12 14:36   ` Thomas Monjalon
  2021-05-13  0:19     ` Min Hu (Connor)
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2021-05-12 14:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Min Hu (Connor); +Cc: dev, ferruh.yigit, erik.g.carrillo, rsanford

11/05/2021 02:53, Min Hu (Connor):
> Segmentation fault may occur without checking if memzone
> reserves succeed or not.
> 
> This patch fixed it.
> 
> Fixes: 50247fe03fe0 ("test/timer: exercise new APIs in secondary process")
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> 
> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>

You missed reporting previous ack:
Acked-by: Erik Gabriel Carrillo <erik.g.carrillo@intel.com>

Applied, thanks

PS: please do not forget marking old patches as superseded
when sending a new version.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] test/timer: fix memzone reserve failure check
  2021-05-12 14:36   ` Thomas Monjalon
@ 2021-05-13  0:19     ` Min Hu (Connor)
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Min Hu (Connor) @ 2021-05-13  0:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Thomas Monjalon; +Cc: dev, ferruh.yigit, erik.g.carrillo, rsanford



在 2021/5/12 22:36, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
> 11/05/2021 02:53, Min Hu (Connor):
>> Segmentation fault may occur without checking if memzone
>> reserves succeed or not.
>>
>> This patch fixed it.
>>
>> Fixes: 50247fe03fe0 ("test/timer: exercise new APIs in secondary process")
>> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
> 
> You missed reporting previous ack:
> Acked-by: Erik Gabriel Carrillo <erik.g.carrillo@intel.com>
> 
> Applied, thanks
> 
> PS: please do not forget marking old patches as superseded
> when sending a new version.
Got it, thanks.
> 
> 
> .
> 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2021-05-13  0:19 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-04-22  9:18 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test/timer: fix memzone reserve failure check Min Hu (Connor)
2021-05-01 20:00 ` Carrillo, Erik G
2021-05-04  1:08   ` Min Hu (Connor)
2021-05-04  1:07 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Min Hu (Connor)
2021-05-04  1:18   ` Carrillo, Erik G
2021-05-10 14:13   ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-05-11  0:53     ` Min Hu (Connor)
2021-05-11  0:53 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Min Hu (Connor)
2021-05-12 14:36   ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-05-13  0:19     ` Min Hu (Connor)

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).