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 B5B15A00C2 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:52:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F0DF40150; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:52:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23ECB40150 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:52:26 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1656661945; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=yuhJbp0W6AuPy4nQeUYZJNJkt7vOM33oN/Y7W78hGXM=; b=IU7Fus2cpPsEPHo7aL2TZm6S3uQeydT8V3KZo3FKZu3VPePoCR3K77PxaWGgRpL+8v5YI9 wLZZHGPhggTYlTFp/DaDbCoXJD6QFkPbuHjvfqVUguVigiA760RLOf3lyL/0/9HLATf4xk VsIEKBpGNn0BPTqJWl7DGaSSOQe3cNQ= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx3-rdu2.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-288-pyeWYXQQMVmY0fCIy41_TA-1; Fri, 01 Jul 2022 03:52:22 -0400 X-MC-Unique: pyeWYXQQMVmY0fCIy41_TA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.8]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C7913C021BA; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 07:52:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.39.208.30] (unknown [10.39.208.30]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45425C2810D; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 07:52:21 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:52:19 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.10.0 To: "Hu, Jiayu" , "dev@dpdk.org" Cc: "Xia, Chenbo" , "stable@dpdk.org" , David Marchand References: <20220623010858.951367-1-jiayu.hu@intel.com> <20220629090706.1395614-1-jiayu.hu@intel.com> <844c38da-2fcc-a612-20e3-f0422edd59e6@redhat.com> From: Maxime Coquelin Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] vhost: fix unchecked return value In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.85 on 10.11.54.8 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=maxime.coquelin@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: stable-bounces@dpdk.org On 7/1/22 09:11, Hu, Jiayu wrote: > Hi Maxime, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Maxime Coquelin >> Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2022 5:57 PM >> To: Hu, Jiayu ; dev@dpdk.org >> Cc: Xia, Chenbo ; stable@dpdk.org; David Marchand >> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] vhost: fix unchecked return value >> >> >> >> On 6/29/22 11:07, Jiayu Hu wrote: >>> This patch checks the return value of rte_dma_info_get() called in >>> rte_vhost_async_dma_configure(). >>> >>> Coverity issue: 379066 >>> Fixes: 53d3f4778c1d ("vhost: integrate dmadev in asynchronous >>> data-path") >>> Cc: stable@dpdk.org >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jiayu Hu >>> Reviewed-by: Chenbo Xia >>> --- >>> v2: >>> - add cc stable tag >>> --- >>> lib/vhost/vhost.c | 6 +++++- >>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/lib/vhost/vhost.c b/lib/vhost/vhost.c index >>> b14521e4d1..70c04c036e 100644 >>> --- a/lib/vhost/vhost.c >>> +++ b/lib/vhost/vhost.c >>> @@ -1868,7 +1868,11 @@ rte_vhost_async_dma_configure(int16_t >> dma_id, uint16_t vchan_id) >>> return -1; >>> } >>> >>> - rte_dma_info_get(dma_id, &info); >>> + if (rte_dma_info_get(dma_id, &info) != 0) { >>> + VHOST_LOG_CONFIG(ERR, "Fail to get DMA %d >> information.\n", dma_id); >>> + return -1; >>> + } >>> + >>> if (vchan_id >= info.max_vchans) { >>> VHOST_LOG_CONFIG(ERR, "Invalid DMA %d vChannel %u.\n", >> dma_id, vchan_id); >>> return -1; >> >> The patch itself looks good, but rte_vhost_async_dma_configure() should be >> protected by a lock, as concurrent calls of this function would lead to >> undefined behavior. > > This function is expected to be called only once. Is there any use case to cause it > called concurrently? Ok, so what about: ================================================================ static bool dma_configured: int rte_vhost_async_dma_configure(int16_t dma_id, uint16_t vchan_id) { struct rte_dma_info info; void *pkts_cmpl_flag_addr; uint16_t max_desc; if (dma_configured) return -1; dma_configured = true; ================================================================ If this is called only once, this should be OK. ;) Maxime > Thanks, > Jiayu >> >> Can you cook something? >> >> David, is that the issue you mentioned me this week or was it another one? >> >> Thanks, >> Maxime >