[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] eal: fix core number validation

[Hari Kumar Vemula <hari.kumarx.vemula@intel.com>]

When incorrect core value or range provided,
as part of -l command line option, a crash occurs.

Added valid range checks to fix the crash.

Added ut check for negative core values.
Added unit test case for invalid core number range.

Fixes: d888cb8b9613 ("eal: add core list input format")
Cc: stable@dpdk.org

Signed-off-by: Hari Kumar Vemula <hari.kumarx.vemula@intel.com>
--
v5: corrected unit test case for -l option
v4: Used RTE_MAX_LCORE for max core check
v3: Added unit test cases for invalid core number range
v2: Replace strtoul with strtol
    Modified log message
---
 lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c |  9 +++++++--
 test/test/test_eal_flags.c                 | 15 ++++++++++++++-
 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
index 6e3a83b98..14f40c62c 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
@@ -592,7 +592,9 @@ eal_parse_corelist(const char *corelist)
 		if (*corelist == '\0')
 			return -1;
 		errno = 0;
-		idx = strtoul(corelist, &end, 10);
+		idx = strtol(corelist, &end, 10);
+		if (idx < 0 || idx >= (int)cfg->lcore_count)
+			return -1;
 		if (errno || end == NULL)
 			return -1;
 		while (isblank(*end))
@@ -1103,6 +1105,7 @@ eal_parse_common_option(int opt, const char *optarg,
 {
 	static int b_used;
 	static int w_used;
+	struct rte_config *cfg = rte_eal_get_configuration();
 
 	switch (opt) {
 	/* blacklist */
@@ -1145,7 +1148,9 @@ eal_parse_common_option(int opt, const char *optarg,
 	/* corelist */
 	case 'l':
 		if (eal_parse_corelist(optarg) < 0) {
-			RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, "invalid core list\n");
+			RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL,
+				"invalid core list, please check core numbers are in [0, %u] range\n",
+					cfg->lcore_count-1);
 			return -1;
 		}
 
diff --git a/test/test/test_eal_flags.c b/test/test/test_eal_flags.c
index 2acab9d69..4dc22ec36 100644
--- a/test/test/test_eal_flags.c
+++ b/test/test/test_eal_flags.c
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
 #include <sys/file.h>
 #include <limits.h>
 
+#include <rte_per_lcore.h>
 #include <rte_debug.h>
 #include <rte_string_fns.h>
 
@@ -513,6 +514,16 @@ test_missing_c_flag(void)
 	const char *argv25[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
 				 "-n", "3", "--lcores",
 				 "0-1,2@(5-7),(3-5)@(0,2),(0,6),7"};
+	/* core number is negative value */
+	const char * const argv26[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
+				"-n", "3", "-l", "-5" };
+	const char * const argv27[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
+				"-n", "3", "-l", "-5-7" };
+	/* core number is maximum value */
+	const char * const argv28[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
+				"-n", "3", "-l", RTE_STR(RTE_MAX_LCORE) };
+	const char * const argv29[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
+				"-n", "3", "-l", "1-"RTE_STR(RTE_MAX_LCORE) };
 
 	if (launch_proc(argv2) != 0) {
 		printf("Error - "
@@ -556,7 +567,9 @@ test_missing_c_flag(void)
 	    launch_proc(argv18) == 0 || launch_proc(argv19) == 0 ||
 	    launch_proc(argv20) == 0 || launch_proc(argv21) == 0 ||
 	    launch_proc(argv21) == 0 || launch_proc(argv22) == 0 ||
-	    launch_proc(argv23) == 0 || launch_proc(argv24) == 0) {
+	    launch_proc(argv23) == 0 || launch_proc(argv24) == 0 ||
+	    launch_proc(argv26) == 0 || launch_proc(argv27) == 0 ||
+	    launch_proc(argv28) == 0 || launch_proc(argv29) == 0) {
 		printf("Error - "
 		       "process ran without error with invalid --lcore flag\n");
 		return -1;
-- 
2.17.2