From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.elyzion.net (ks3307715.kimsufi.com [178.32.223.91]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04F53E62 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 17:56:01 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.181.31] (freeside.gandi.net [217.70.181.31]) by mail.elyzion.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B14A91CE0F2F for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 17:40:57 +0100 (CET) To: dev@dpdk.org References: <1446003855-5947-1-git-send-email-jijiang.liu@intel.com> <20151028144048.GA2504@bricha3-MOBL3> From: Nikita Kozlov X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 Message-ID: <5630FE1F.3020306@elyzion.net> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 17:55:59 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20151028144048.GA2504@bricha3-MOBL3> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] lib/lpm:fix two issues in the delete_depth_small() X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 16:56:01 -0000 On 10/28/2015 03:40 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:44:15AM +0800, Jijiang Liu wrote: >> Fix two issues in the delete_depth_small() function. >> >> 1> The control is not strict in this function. >> >> In the following structure, >> struct rte_lpm_tbl24_entry { >> union { >> uint8_t next_hop; >> uint8_t tbl8_gindex; >> }; >> uint8_t ext_entry :1; >> } >> >> When ext_entry = 0, use next_hop.only to process rte_lpm_tbl24_entry. >> >> When ext_entry = 1, use tbl8_gindex to process the rte_lpm_tbl8_entry. >> >> When using LPM24 + 8 algorithm, it will use ext_entry to decide to process rte_lpm_tbl24_entry structure or rte_lpm_tbl8_entry structure. >> If a route is deleted, the prefix of previous route is used to override the deleted route. when (lpm->tbl24[i].ext_entry == 0 && lpm->tbl24[i].depth > depth) >> it should be ignored, but due to the incorrect logic, the next_hop is used as tbl8_gindex and will process the rte_lpm_tbl8_entry. >> >> 2> Initialization of rte_lpm_tbl8_entry is incorrect in this function >> >> In this function, use new rte_lpm_tbl8_entry we call A to replace the old rte_lpm_tbl8_entry. But the valid_group do not set VALID, so it will be INVALID. >> Then when adding a new route which depth is > 24,the tbl8_alloc() function will search the rte_lpm_tbl8_entrys to find INVALID valid_group, >> and it will return the A to the add_depth_big function, so A's data is overridden. >> >> Signed-off-by: NaNa >> > Hi NaNa, Jijiang, > > since this patch contains two separate fixes, it would be better split into > two separate patches, one for each fix. Also, please add a "Fixes" line to > the commit log. > > Are there still plans for a unit test to demonstrate the bug(s) and make it easy > for us to verify the fix? > > Regards, > /Bruce Hello, It's the same fix as the one sent here (which contained some tests, maybe we can use them ?) http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-October/025871.html . For what is worth, we are using those fix at my company and they are fixing the described bug. -- Nikita