DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: dev@dpdk.org
Cc: bruce.richardson@intel.com
Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/4] hash: allocation of an existing object should fail
Date: Tue,  5 Apr 2016 09:35:57 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1459841759-23296-3-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1459841759-23296-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com>

Change rte_hash*_create() functions to return NULL and set rte_errno to
EEXIST when the object name already exists. This is the behavior
described in the API documentation in the header file.

These functions were returning a pointer to the existing object in that
case, but it is a problem as the caller did not know if the object had
to be freed or not.

Doing this change also makes the hash API more consistent with the other
APIs (mempool, rings, ...).

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 app/test/test_hash.c              | 65 ++++++++++++++-------------------------
 lib/librte_hash/rte_cuckoo_hash.c |  6 ++--
 lib/librte_hash/rte_fbk_hash.c    |  5 ++-
 3 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)

diff --git a/app/test/test_hash.c b/app/test/test_hash.c
index 2f3d884..adbdb4a 100644
--- a/app/test/test_hash.c
+++ b/app/test/test_hash.c
@@ -805,15 +805,11 @@ fbk_hash_unit_test(void)
 	RETURN_IF_ERROR_FBK(handle == NULL, "fbk hash creation should have succeeded");
 
 	tmp = rte_fbk_hash_create(&invalid_params_same_name_2);
-	RETURN_IF_ERROR_FBK(tmp == NULL, "fbk hash creation should have succeeded");
-	if (tmp != handle) {
-			printf("ERROR line %d: hashes should have been the same\n", __LINE__);
-			rte_fbk_hash_free(handle);
-			rte_fbk_hash_free(tmp);
-			return -1;
-	}
+	if (tmp != NULL)
+		rte_fbk_hash_free(tmp);
+	RETURN_IF_ERROR_FBK(tmp != NULL, "fbk hash creation should have failed");
 
-	/* we are not freeing tmp or handle here because we need a hash list
+	/* we are not freeing  handle here because we need a hash list
 	 * to be not empty for the next test */
 
 	/* create a hash in non-empty list - good for coverage */
@@ -988,7 +984,7 @@ static int test_fbk_hash_find_existing(void)
  */
 static int test_hash_creation_with_bad_parameters(void)
 {
-	struct rte_hash *handle;
+	struct rte_hash *handle, *tmp;
 	struct rte_hash_parameters params;
 
 	handle = rte_hash_create(NULL);
@@ -1038,7 +1034,23 @@ static int test_hash_creation_with_bad_parameters(void)
 		return -1;
 	}
 
+	/* test with same name should fail */
+	memcpy(&params, &ut_params, sizeof(params));
+	params.name = "same_name";
+	handle = rte_hash_create(&params);
+	if (handle == NULL) {
+		printf("Cannot create first hash table with 'same_name'\n");
+		return -1;
+	}
+	tmp = rte_hash_create(&params);
+	if (tmp != NULL) {
+		printf("Creation of hash table with same name should fail\n");
+		rte_hash_free(handle);
+		rte_hash_free(tmp);
+		return -1;
+	}
 	rte_hash_free(handle);
+
 	printf("# Test successful. No more errors expected\n");
 
 	return 0;
@@ -1051,12 +1063,12 @@ static int test_hash_creation_with_bad_parameters(void)
 static int
 test_hash_creation_with_good_parameters(void)
 {
-	struct rte_hash *handle, *tmp;
+	struct rte_hash *handle;
 	struct rte_hash_parameters params;
 
 	/* create with null hash function - should choose DEFAULT_HASH_FUNC */
 	memcpy(&params, &ut_params, sizeof(params));
-	params.name = "same_name";
+	params.name = "name";
 	params.hash_func = NULL;
 	handle = rte_hash_create(&params);
 	if (handle == NULL) {
@@ -1064,37 +1076,6 @@ test_hash_creation_with_good_parameters(void)
 		return -1;
 	}
 
-	/* this test is trying to create a hash with the same name as previous one.
-	 * this should return a pointer to the hash we previously created.
-	 * the previous hash isn't freed exactly for the purpose of it being in
-	 * the hash list.
-	 */
-	memcpy(&params, &ut_params, sizeof(params));
-	params.name = "same_name";
-	tmp = rte_hash_create(&params);
-
-	/* check if the returned handle is actually equal to the previous hash */
-	if (handle != tmp) {
-		rte_hash_free(handle);
-		rte_hash_free(tmp);
-		printf("Creating hash with existing name was successful\n");
-		return -1;
-	}
-
-	/* try creating hash when there already are hashes in the list.
-	 * the previous hash is not freed to have a non-empty hash list.
-	 * the other hash that's in the list is still pointed to by "handle" var.
-	 */
-	memcpy(&params, &ut_params, sizeof(params));
-	params.name = "different_name";
-	tmp = rte_hash_create(&params);
-	if (tmp == NULL) {
-		rte_hash_free(handle);
-		printf("Creating hash with valid parameters failed\n");
-		return -1;
-	}
-
-	rte_hash_free(tmp);
 	rte_hash_free(handle);
 
 	return 0;
diff --git a/lib/librte_hash/rte_cuckoo_hash.c b/lib/librte_hash/rte_cuckoo_hash.c
index 71b5b76..ccec2db 100644
--- a/lib/librte_hash/rte_cuckoo_hash.c
+++ b/lib/librte_hash/rte_cuckoo_hash.c
@@ -230,8 +230,10 @@ rte_hash_create(const struct rte_hash_parameters *params)
 
 	/* Guarantee there's no existing */
 	h = rte_hash_find_existing(params->name);
-	if (h != NULL)
-		return h;
+	if (h != NULL) {
+		rte_errno = EEXIST;
+		return NULL;
+	}
 
 	te = rte_zmalloc("HASH_TAILQ_ENTRY", sizeof(*te), 0);
 	if (te == NULL) {
diff --git a/lib/librte_hash/rte_fbk_hash.c b/lib/librte_hash/rte_fbk_hash.c
index 8752a47..ba1e475 100644
--- a/lib/librte_hash/rte_fbk_hash.c
+++ b/lib/librte_hash/rte_fbk_hash.c
@@ -140,8 +140,11 @@ rte_fbk_hash_create(const struct rte_fbk_hash_params *params)
 		if (strncmp(params->name, ht->name, RTE_FBK_HASH_NAMESIZE) == 0)
 			break;
 	}
-	if (te != NULL)
+	if (te != NULL) {
+		ht = NULL;
+		rte_errno = EEXIST;
 		goto exit;
+	}
 
 	te = rte_zmalloc("FBK_HASH_TAILQ_ENTRY", sizeof(*te), 0);
 	if (te == NULL) {
-- 
2.1.4

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-04-05  7:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-03-15 12:25 [dpdk-dev] [RFC] hash/lpm: return NULL if the object exists Olivier Matz
2016-03-25 10:32 ` Olivier Matz
2016-03-25 10:45   ` Bruce Richardson
2016-03-30 15:30 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/4] fix lpm and hash creation Olivier Matz
2016-03-30 15:30   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/4] lpm: allocation of an existing object should fail Olivier Matz
2016-03-30 21:46     ` Stephen Hemminger
2016-03-31  7:35       ` Olivier Matz
2016-04-01 16:25         ` Olivier Matz
2016-03-31 10:55       ` Bruce Richardson
2016-03-30 15:30   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/4] hash: " Olivier Matz
2016-03-30 15:30   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/4] hash: keep the list locked at creation Olivier Matz
2016-03-30 15:30   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/4] autotest: fix func reentrancy Olivier Matz
2016-03-31  7:35   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/4] fix lpm and hash creation Olivier Matz
2016-04-05  7:35   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/4] fix creation of duplicate lpm and hash Olivier Matz
2016-04-05  7:35     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/4] lpm: allocation of an existing object should fail Olivier Matz
2016-04-05  7:35     ` Olivier Matz [this message]
2016-04-05  7:35     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/4] hash: keep the list locked at creation Olivier Matz
2016-04-05 11:05       ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2016-04-05  7:35     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/4] autotest: fix func reentrancy Olivier Matz
2016-04-05 11:00       ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2016-04-05 11:53     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/4] fix creation of duplicate lpm and hash Olivier Matz
2016-04-05 11:53       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/4] lpm: allocation of an existing object should fail Olivier Matz
2016-04-05 11:53       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/4] hash: " Olivier Matz
2016-04-05 11:53       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/4] hash: keep the list locked at creation Olivier Matz
2016-04-05 11:53       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 4/4] autotest: fix func reentrancy Olivier Matz
2016-04-05 15:51       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/4] fix creation of duplicate lpm and hash Thomas Monjalon
2016-04-06 10:11         ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2016-04-06 10:32       ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2016-04-06 11:14         ` Olivier Matz
2016-04-06 11:20           ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2016-04-06 11:57             ` Olivier Matz
2016-04-06 13:27       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 " Olivier Matz
2016-04-06 13:27         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] lpm: allocation of an existing object should fail Olivier Matz
2016-04-06 13:27         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/4] hash: " Olivier Matz
2016-04-06 13:28         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/4] hash: keep the list locked at creation Olivier Matz
2016-04-06 13:28         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 4/4] autotest: fix func reentrancy Olivier Matz
2016-04-06 15:31         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/4] fix creation of duplicate lpm and hash Thomas Monjalon

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1459841759-23296-3-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com \
    --to=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).