DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / Atom feed
* [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] service: don't walk out of bounds when checking services
@ 2019-11-26 14:56 Aaron Conole
  2019-12-02 16:16 ` Eads, Gage
                   ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Aaron Conole @ 2019-11-26 14:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dev
  Cc: Harry van Haaren, Bruce Richardson, Pavan Nikhilesh, Gage Eads,
	Thomas Monjalon, David Marchand

The service_valid call is used without properly bounds checking the
input parameter.  Almost all instances of the service_valid call are
inside a for() loop that prevents excessive walks, but some of the
public APIs don't bounds check and will pass invalid arguments.

Prevent this by using SERVICE_GET_OR_ERR_RET where it makes sense,
and adding a bounds check to one service_valid() use.

Fixes: 8d39d3e237c2 ("service: fix race in service on app lcore function")
Fixes: e9139a32f6e8 ("service: add function to run on app lcore")
Fixes: e30dd31847d2 ("service: add mechanism for quiescing")
Signed-off-by: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
---
 lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c | 23 +++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c b/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c
index 79235c03f8..73de7bbade 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c
@@ -345,11 +345,12 @@ rte_service_runner_do_callback(struct rte_service_spec_impl *s,
 
 
 static inline int32_t
-service_run(uint32_t i, struct core_state *cs, uint64_t service_mask)
+service_run(uint32_t i, struct core_state *cs, uint64_t service_mask,
+	    struct rte_service_spec_impl *s)
 {
-	if (!service_valid(i))
-		return -EINVAL;
-	struct rte_service_spec_impl *s = &rte_services[i];
+	if (!s)
+		SERVICE_VALID_GET_OR_ERR_RET(i, s, -EINVAL);
+
 	if (s->comp_runstate != RUNSTATE_RUNNING ||
 			s->app_runstate != RUNSTATE_RUNNING ||
 			!(service_mask & (UINT64_C(1) << i))) {
@@ -383,7 +384,7 @@ rte_service_may_be_active(uint32_t id)
 	int32_t lcore_count = rte_service_lcore_list(ids, RTE_MAX_LCORE);
 	int i;
 
-	if (!service_valid(id))
+	if (id >= RTE_SERVICE_NUM_MAX || !service_valid(id))
 		return -EINVAL;
 
 	for (i = 0; i < lcore_count; i++) {
@@ -397,12 +398,10 @@ rte_service_may_be_active(uint32_t id)
 int32_t
 rte_service_run_iter_on_app_lcore(uint32_t id, uint32_t serialize_mt_unsafe)
 {
-	/* run service on calling core, using all-ones as the service mask */
-	if (!service_valid(id))
-		return -EINVAL;
-
 	struct core_state *cs = &lcore_states[rte_lcore_id()];
-	struct rte_service_spec_impl *s = &rte_services[id];
+	struct rte_service_spec_impl *s;
+
+	SERVICE_VALID_GET_OR_ERR_RET(id, s, -EINVAL);
 
 	/* Atomically add this core to the mapped cores first, then examine if
 	 * we can run the service. This avoids a race condition between
@@ -418,7 +417,7 @@ rte_service_run_iter_on_app_lcore(uint32_t id, uint32_t serialize_mt_unsafe)
 		return -EBUSY;
 	}
 
-	int ret = service_run(id, cs, UINT64_MAX);
+	int ret = service_run(id, cs, UINT64_MAX, s);
 
 	if (serialize_mt_unsafe)
 		rte_atomic32_dec(&s->num_mapped_cores);
@@ -439,7 +438,7 @@ rte_service_runner_func(void *arg)
 
 		for (i = 0; i < RTE_SERVICE_NUM_MAX; i++) {
 			/* return value ignored as no change to code flow */
-			service_run(i, cs, service_mask);
+			service_run(i, cs, service_mask, NULL);
 		}
 
 		cs->loops++;
-- 
2.21.0


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] service: don't walk out of bounds when checking services
  2019-11-26 14:56 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] service: don't walk out of bounds when checking services Aaron Conole
@ 2019-12-02 16:16 ` Eads, Gage
  2019-12-02 16:19 ` David Marchand
  2019-12-03 21:15 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Aaron Conole
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Eads, Gage @ 2019-12-02 16:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Aaron Conole, dev
  Cc: Van Haaren, Harry, Richardson, Bruce, Pavan Nikhilesh,
	Thomas Monjalon, David Marchand

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2019 8:56 AM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Van Haaren, Harry <harry.van.haaren@intel.com>; Richardson, Bruce
> <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Pavan Nikhilesh
> <pbhagavatula@marvell.com>; Eads, Gage <gage.eads@intel.com>; Thomas
> Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; David Marchand
> <dmarchan@redhat.com>
> Subject: [PATCH] service: don't walk out of bounds when checking services
> 
> The service_valid call is used without properly bounds checking the input
> parameter.  Almost all instances of the service_valid call are inside a for()
> loop that prevents excessive walks, but some of the public APIs don't bounds
> check and will pass invalid arguments.
> 
> Prevent this by using SERVICE_GET_OR_ERR_RET where it makes sense, and
> adding a bounds check to one service_valid() use.
> 
> Fixes: 8d39d3e237c2 ("service: fix race in service on app lcore function")
> Fixes: e9139a32f6e8 ("service: add function to run on app lcore")
> Fixes: e30dd31847d2 ("service: add mechanism for quiescing")
> Signed-off-by: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>

Acked-by: Gage Eads <gage.eads@intel.com>

Thanks,
Gage

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] service: don't walk out of bounds when checking services
  2019-11-26 14:56 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] service: don't walk out of bounds when checking services Aaron Conole
  2019-12-02 16:16 ` Eads, Gage
@ 2019-12-02 16:19 ` David Marchand
  2019-12-03 15:10   ` Aaron Conole
  2019-12-03 21:15 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Aaron Conole
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: David Marchand @ 2019-12-02 16:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Aaron Conole
  Cc: dev, Harry van Haaren, Bruce Richardson, Pavan Nikhilesh,
	Gage Eads, Thomas Monjalon

On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 3:56 PM Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> The service_valid call is used without properly bounds checking the
> input parameter.  Almost all instances of the service_valid call are
> inside a for() loop that prevents excessive walks, but some of the
> public APIs don't bounds check and will pass invalid arguments.
>
> Prevent this by using SERVICE_GET_OR_ERR_RET where it makes sense,
> and adding a bounds check to one service_valid() use.
>
> Fixes: 8d39d3e237c2 ("service: fix race in service on app lcore function")
> Fixes: e9139a32f6e8 ("service: add function to run on app lcore")
> Fixes: e30dd31847d2 ("service: add mechanism for quiescing")
> Signed-off-by: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
> ---
>  lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c | 23 +++++++++++------------
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c b/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c
> index 79235c03f8..73de7bbade 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c
> @@ -345,11 +345,12 @@ rte_service_runner_do_callback(struct rte_service_spec_impl *s,
>
>
>  static inline int32_t
> -service_run(uint32_t i, struct core_state *cs, uint64_t service_mask)
> +service_run(uint32_t i, struct core_state *cs, uint64_t service_mask,
> +           struct rte_service_spec_impl *s)
>  {
> -       if (!service_valid(i))
> -               return -EINVAL;
> -       struct rte_service_spec_impl *s = &rte_services[i];
> +       if (!s)
> +               SERVICE_VALID_GET_OR_ERR_RET(i, s, -EINVAL);
> +

No need to check the service if we ensure that the passed index is valid.
See below.


>         if (s->comp_runstate != RUNSTATE_RUNNING ||
>                         s->app_runstate != RUNSTATE_RUNNING ||
>                         !(service_mask & (UINT64_C(1) << i))) {
> @@ -383,7 +384,7 @@ rte_service_may_be_active(uint32_t id)
>         int32_t lcore_count = rte_service_lcore_list(ids, RTE_MAX_LCORE);
>         int i;
>
> -       if (!service_valid(id))
> +       if (id >= RTE_SERVICE_NUM_MAX || !service_valid(id))
>                 return -EINVAL;
>
>         for (i = 0; i < lcore_count; i++) {
> @@ -397,12 +398,10 @@ rte_service_may_be_active(uint32_t id)
>  int32_t
>  rte_service_run_iter_on_app_lcore(uint32_t id, uint32_t serialize_mt_unsafe)
>  {
> -       /* run service on calling core, using all-ones as the service mask */
> -       if (!service_valid(id))
> -               return -EINVAL;
> -
>         struct core_state *cs = &lcore_states[rte_lcore_id()];
> -       struct rte_service_spec_impl *s = &rte_services[id];
> +       struct rte_service_spec_impl *s;
> +
> +       SERVICE_VALID_GET_OR_ERR_RET(id, s, -EINVAL);
>
>         /* Atomically add this core to the mapped cores first, then examine if
>          * we can run the service. This avoids a race condition between
> @@ -418,7 +417,7 @@ rte_service_run_iter_on_app_lcore(uint32_t id, uint32_t serialize_mt_unsafe)
>                 return -EBUSY;
>         }
>
> -       int ret = service_run(id, cs, UINT64_MAX);
> +       int ret = service_run(id, cs, UINT64_MAX, s);
>
>         if (serialize_mt_unsafe)
>                 rte_atomic32_dec(&s->num_mapped_cores);
> @@ -439,7 +438,7 @@ rte_service_runner_func(void *arg)
>
>                 for (i = 0; i < RTE_SERVICE_NUM_MAX; i++) {
>                         /* return value ignored as no change to code flow */

if (!service_valid(idx))
    continue;

Plus, if we add this check here, thenall loops in this file are consistent.
WDYT?


-- 
David Marchand


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] service: don't walk out of bounds when checking services
  2019-12-02 16:19 ` David Marchand
@ 2019-12-03 15:10   ` Aaron Conole
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Aaron Conole @ 2019-12-03 15:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Marchand
  Cc: dev, Harry van Haaren, Bruce Richardson, Pavan Nikhilesh,
	Gage Eads, Thomas Monjalon

David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> writes:

> On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 3:56 PM Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> The service_valid call is used without properly bounds checking the
>> input parameter.  Almost all instances of the service_valid call are
>> inside a for() loop that prevents excessive walks, but some of the
>> public APIs don't bounds check and will pass invalid arguments.
>>
>> Prevent this by using SERVICE_GET_OR_ERR_RET where it makes sense,
>> and adding a bounds check to one service_valid() use.
>>
>> Fixes: 8d39d3e237c2 ("service: fix race in service on app lcore function")
>> Fixes: e9139a32f6e8 ("service: add function to run on app lcore")
>> Fixes: e30dd31847d2 ("service: add mechanism for quiescing")
>> Signed-off-by: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>  lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c | 23 +++++++++++------------
>>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c b/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c
>> index 79235c03f8..73de7bbade 100644
>> --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c
>> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c
>> @@ -345,11 +345,12 @@ rte_service_runner_do_callback(struct rte_service_spec_impl *s,
>>
>>
>>  static inline int32_t
>> -service_run(uint32_t i, struct core_state *cs, uint64_t service_mask)
>> +service_run(uint32_t i, struct core_state *cs, uint64_t service_mask,
>> +           struct rte_service_spec_impl *s)
>>  {
>> -       if (!service_valid(i))
>> -               return -EINVAL;
>> -       struct rte_service_spec_impl *s = &rte_services[i];
>> +       if (!s)
>> +               SERVICE_VALID_GET_OR_ERR_RET(i, s, -EINVAL);
>> +
>
> No need to check the service if we ensure that the passed index is valid.
> See below.

Okay.  I will document that then ;)

>
>>         if (s->comp_runstate != RUNSTATE_RUNNING ||
>>                         s->app_runstate != RUNSTATE_RUNNING ||
>>                         !(service_mask & (UINT64_C(1) << i))) {
>> @@ -383,7 +384,7 @@ rte_service_may_be_active(uint32_t id)
>>         int32_t lcore_count = rte_service_lcore_list(ids, RTE_MAX_LCORE);
>>         int i;
>>
>> -       if (!service_valid(id))
>> +       if (id >= RTE_SERVICE_NUM_MAX || !service_valid(id))
>>                 return -EINVAL;
>>
>>         for (i = 0; i < lcore_count; i++) {
>> @@ -397,12 +398,10 @@ rte_service_may_be_active(uint32_t id)
>>  int32_t
>>  rte_service_run_iter_on_app_lcore(uint32_t id, uint32_t serialize_mt_unsafe)
>>  {
>> -       /* run service on calling core, using all-ones as the service mask */
>> -       if (!service_valid(id))
>> -               return -EINVAL;
>> -
>>         struct core_state *cs = &lcore_states[rte_lcore_id()];
>> -       struct rte_service_spec_impl *s = &rte_services[id];
>> +       struct rte_service_spec_impl *s;
>> +
>> +       SERVICE_VALID_GET_OR_ERR_RET(id, s, -EINVAL);
>>
>>         /* Atomically add this core to the mapped cores first, then examine if
>>          * we can run the service. This avoids a race condition between
>> @@ -418,7 +417,7 @@ rte_service_run_iter_on_app_lcore(uint32_t id, uint32_t serialize_mt_unsafe)
>>                 return -EBUSY;
>>         }
>>
>> -       int ret = service_run(id, cs, UINT64_MAX);
>> +       int ret = service_run(id, cs, UINT64_MAX, s);
>>
>>         if (serialize_mt_unsafe)
>>                 rte_atomic32_dec(&s->num_mapped_cores);
>> @@ -439,7 +438,7 @@ rte_service_runner_func(void *arg)
>>
>>                 for (i = 0; i < RTE_SERVICE_NUM_MAX; i++) {
>>                         /* return value ignored as no change to code flow */
>
> if (!service_valid(idx))
>     continue;
>
> Plus, if we add this check here, thenall loops in this file are consistent.
> WDYT?

Agreed - it's better.  Okay.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] service: don't walk out of bounds when checking services
  2019-11-26 14:56 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] service: don't walk out of bounds when checking services Aaron Conole
  2019-12-02 16:16 ` Eads, Gage
  2019-12-02 16:19 ` David Marchand
@ 2019-12-03 21:15 ` " Aaron Conole
  2019-12-04  8:33   ` David Marchand
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Aaron Conole @ 2019-12-03 21:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dev
  Cc: Harry van Haaren, Bruce Richardson, Pavan Nikhilesh, Gage Eads,
	Thomas Monjalon, David Marchand

The service_valid call is used without properly bounds checking the
input parameter.  Almost all instances of the service_valid call are
inside a for() loop that prevents excessive walks, but some of the
public APIs don't bounds check and will pass invalid arguments.

Prevent this by using SERVICE_GET_OR_ERR_RET where it makes sense,
and adding a bounds check to one service_valid() use.

Fixes: 8d39d3e237c2 ("service: fix race in service on app lcore function")
Fixes: e9139a32f6e8 ("service: add function to run on app lcore")
Fixes: e30dd31847d2 ("service: add mechanism for quiescing")
Signed-off-by: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
---
v2:
 - make for() loop consistent and service_run() always require a valid 's'
   pointer
 - introduce service_get() for a future patch to clean up the
   bare references to 'rte_services[i]'
 - remove some useless 'inline' specifiers on functions (they aren't
   needed in .c files).  a future patch can clean up the others.

 lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c b/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c
index 79235c03f8..7e537b8cd2 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_service.c
@@ -137,6 +137,12 @@ service_valid(uint32_t id)
 	return !!(rte_services[id].internal_flags & SERVICE_F_REGISTERED);
 }
 
+static struct rte_service_spec_impl *
+service_get(uint32_t id)
+{
+	return &rte_services[id];
+}
+
 /* validate ID and retrieve service pointer, or return error value */
 #define SERVICE_VALID_GET_OR_ERR_RET(id, service, retval) do {          \
 	if (id >= RTE_SERVICE_NUM_MAX || !service_valid(id))            \
@@ -344,12 +350,14 @@ rte_service_runner_do_callback(struct rte_service_spec_impl *s,
 }
 
 
-static inline int32_t
-service_run(uint32_t i, struct core_state *cs, uint64_t service_mask)
+/* Expects the service 's' is valid. */
+static int32_t
+service_run(uint32_t i, struct core_state *cs, uint64_t service_mask,
+	    struct rte_service_spec_impl *s)
 {
-	if (!service_valid(i))
+	if (!s)
 		return -EINVAL;
-	struct rte_service_spec_impl *s = &rte_services[i];
+
 	if (s->comp_runstate != RUNSTATE_RUNNING ||
 			s->app_runstate != RUNSTATE_RUNNING ||
 			!(service_mask & (UINT64_C(1) << i))) {
@@ -383,7 +391,7 @@ rte_service_may_be_active(uint32_t id)
 	int32_t lcore_count = rte_service_lcore_list(ids, RTE_MAX_LCORE);
 	int i;
 
-	if (!service_valid(id))
+	if (id >= RTE_SERVICE_NUM_MAX || !service_valid(id))
 		return -EINVAL;
 
 	for (i = 0; i < lcore_count; i++) {
@@ -397,12 +405,10 @@ rte_service_may_be_active(uint32_t id)
 int32_t
 rte_service_run_iter_on_app_lcore(uint32_t id, uint32_t serialize_mt_unsafe)
 {
-	/* run service on calling core, using all-ones as the service mask */
-	if (!service_valid(id))
-		return -EINVAL;
-
 	struct core_state *cs = &lcore_states[rte_lcore_id()];
-	struct rte_service_spec_impl *s = &rte_services[id];
+	struct rte_service_spec_impl *s;
+
+	SERVICE_VALID_GET_OR_ERR_RET(id, s, -EINVAL);
 
 	/* Atomically add this core to the mapped cores first, then examine if
 	 * we can run the service. This avoids a race condition between
@@ -418,7 +424,7 @@ rte_service_run_iter_on_app_lcore(uint32_t id, uint32_t serialize_mt_unsafe)
 		return -EBUSY;
 	}
 
-	int ret = service_run(id, cs, UINT64_MAX);
+	int ret = service_run(id, cs, UINT64_MAX, s);
 
 	if (serialize_mt_unsafe)
 		rte_atomic32_dec(&s->num_mapped_cores);
@@ -438,8 +444,10 @@ rte_service_runner_func(void *arg)
 		const uint64_t service_mask = cs->service_mask;
 
 		for (i = 0; i < RTE_SERVICE_NUM_MAX; i++) {
+			if (!service_valid(i))
+				continue;
 			/* return value ignored as no change to code flow */
-			service_run(i, cs, service_mask);
+			service_run(i, cs, service_mask, service_get(i));
 		}
 
 		cs->loops++;
-- 
2.21.0


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] service: don't walk out of bounds when checking services
  2019-12-03 21:15 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Aaron Conole
@ 2019-12-04  8:33   ` David Marchand
  2019-12-04  8:34     ` David Marchand
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: David Marchand @ 2019-12-04  8:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Aaron Conole
  Cc: dev, Harry van Haaren, Bruce Richardson, Pavan Nikhilesh,
	Gage Eads, Thomas Monjalon

On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 10:15 PM Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> The service_valid call is used without properly bounds checking the
> input parameter.  Almost all instances of the service_valid call are
> inside a for() loop that prevents excessive walks, but some of the
> public APIs don't bounds check and will pass invalid arguments.
>
> Prevent this by using SERVICE_GET_OR_ERR_RET where it makes sense,
> and adding a bounds check to one service_valid() use.
>
> Fixes: 8d39d3e237c2 ("service: fix race in service on app lcore function")
> Fixes: e9139a32f6e8 ("service: add function to run on app lcore")
> Fixes: e30dd31847d2 ("service: add mechanism for quiescing")
> Signed-off-by: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>

Reviewed-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>


-- 
David Marchand


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] service: don't walk out of bounds when checking services
  2019-12-04  8:33   ` David Marchand
@ 2019-12-04  8:34     ` David Marchand
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: David Marchand @ 2019-12-04  8:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Aaron Conole
  Cc: dev, Harry van Haaren, Bruce Richardson, Pavan Nikhilesh,
	Gage Eads, Thomas Monjalon, dpdk stable

On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 9:33 AM David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 10:15 PM Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > The service_valid call is used without properly bounds checking the
> > input parameter.  Almost all instances of the service_valid call are
> > inside a for() loop that prevents excessive walks, but some of the
> > public APIs don't bounds check and will pass invalid arguments.
> >
> > Prevent this by using SERVICE_GET_OR_ERR_RET where it makes sense,
> > and adding a bounds check to one service_valid() use.
> >
> > Fixes: 8d39d3e237c2 ("service: fix race in service on app lcore function")
> > Fixes: e9139a32f6e8 ("service: add function to run on app lcore")
> > Fixes: e30dd31847d2 ("service: add mechanism for quiescing")
Cc: stable@dpdk.org

> > Signed-off-by: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>

-- 
David Marchand


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread

end of thread, back to index

Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-11-26 14:56 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] service: don't walk out of bounds when checking services Aaron Conole
2019-12-02 16:16 ` Eads, Gage
2019-12-02 16:19 ` David Marchand
2019-12-03 15:10   ` Aaron Conole
2019-12-03 21:15 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Aaron Conole
2019-12-04  8:33   ` David Marchand
2019-12-04  8:34     ` David Marchand

DPDK patches and discussions

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
		dev@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index dev


Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox