From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D91EE2BCE for ; Wed, 25 Apr 2018 10:50:36 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga006.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.51]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 Apr 2018 01:50:35 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.49,325,1520924400"; d="scan'208";a="36884762" Received: from aburakov-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.220.109]) ([10.237.220.109]) by orsmga006.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 25 Apr 2018 01:50:34 -0700 To: "Tan, Jianfeng" , dev@dpdk.org Cc: thomas@monjalon.net References: <02a4a77c846287fcb3abb56af38e8b35dc040979.1523979264.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com> From: "Burakov, Anatoly" Message-ID: Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 09:50:32 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 5/5] malloc: fix potential negative return X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2018 08:50:37 -0000 On 25-Apr-18 9:24 AM, Tan, Jianfeng wrote: > > > On 4/17/2018 11:48 PM, Anatoly Burakov wrote: >> Return value from rte_socket_id_by_idx() may be negative, which would >> result in negative index access. >> >> Additionally, return value was of mismatched type (function returns >> signed int, socket id was unsigned). >> >> Coverity issue: 272571 >> Coverity issue: 272597 >> >> Fixes: 30bc6bf0d516 ("malloc: add function to dump heap contents") >> Cc: anatoly.burakov@intel.com >> >> Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov >> --- >>   lib/librte_eal/common/rte_malloc.c | 6 +++++- >>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_malloc.c >> b/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_malloc.c >> index b51a6d1..f207ba2 100644 >> --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_malloc.c >> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/rte_malloc.c >> @@ -169,7 +169,11 @@ rte_malloc_dump_heaps(FILE *f) >>       unsigned int idx; >>       for (idx = 0; idx < rte_socket_count(); idx++) { >> -        unsigned int socket = rte_socket_id_by_idx(idx); >> +        int socket = rte_socket_id_by_idx(idx); >> +        if (socket < 0) { >> +            RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, "Invalid socket index: %u\n", idx); >> +            continue; >> +        } > > For such check (and many others), we are clear that idx is guaranteed by > rte_socket_count(), so rte_socket_id_by_idx() can never return -1. So > why not just reporting this as false-positive? Well, technically, if someone were to corrupt rte_config, it would introduce a possibility of a negative return. However, i guess, at that point we've got bigger problems, so perhaps you're right and i should drop these fixes. > > Thanks, > Jianfeng > >>           fprintf(f, "Heap on socket %i:\n", socket); >>           malloc_heap_dump(&mcfg->malloc_heaps[socket], f); >>       } > > -- Thanks, Anatoly