From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B83F7A0567;
Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:19:36 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 909C64068C;
Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:19:36 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mga17.intel.com (mga17.intel.com [192.55.52.151])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87A0140687
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 13:19:34 +0100 (CET)
IronPort-SDR: ul1O3rQvbSh2nK/p2Mp8Ae6uFNF1iH0eNRR3t9guDsLv4P8FVgO8u7a9i8/Kg9EoL+J1OIgjXZ
NvMOI2jHRgXQ==
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9917"; a="168368199"
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,237,1610438400"; d="scan'208";a="168368199"
Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65])
by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384;
10 Mar 2021 04:19:33 -0800
IronPort-SDR: BALZp79Z2Pkci0vii7rmh3uYckvF+JRx5nzfpZD3H94d4W01j1yZl9JAFb8brgTydH6q1/28kk
JguzeoSh7QDQ==
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,237,1610438400"; d="scan'208";a="410164384"
Received: from bricha3-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.252.9.86])
by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA;
10 Mar 2021 04:19:31 -0800
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 12:19:24 +0000
From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, david.marchand@redhat.com
Message-ID: <20210310121924.GA1267@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <20210309233116.1934666-1-thomas@monjalon.net>
<20210309233116.1934666-7-thomas@monjalon.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210309233116.1934666-7-thomas@monjalon.net>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 06/11] eal: catch invalid log level number
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 12:31:10AM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> The parsing check for invalid log level was not trying to catch
> irrelevant numeric values.
> A log level 0 or too high is now a failure in options parsing
> so it can be caught early.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
One thing I'd note here is that our log range of 1 to 8 is a little
strange, and that it would be nice if we could accept 9 as a valid log
level too on the cmdline. Ideally 0 would also be acceptable, for all
logging off, but it's more likely that people want to up the log level than
reduce it, and 9 is a more expected max value than 8.
> ---
> lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
> index febc99612a..5b9ce286ff 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
> @@ -1289,7 +1289,7 @@ eal_parse_log_level(const char *arg)
> }
>
> priority = eal_parse_log_priority(level);
> - if (priority < 0) {
> + if (priority <= 0 || priority > (int) RTE_LOG_MAX) {
> fprintf(stderr, "invalid log priority: %s\n", level);
> goto fail;
> }