* [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: enforce no option for dynamic fields and flags
@ 2021-10-12 19:39 David Marchand
2021-10-12 20:14 ` Stephen Hemminger
2021-10-13 8:37 ` Kinsella, Ray
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: David Marchand @ 2021-10-12 19:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dev; +Cc: mdr, thomas, Olivier Matz, Konstantin Ananyev
As stated in the API, dynamic field and flags should be created with no
additional flag (simply in the API for future changes).
Fix the dynamic flag register helper which was not enforcing it and add
unit tests.
Fixes: 4958ca3a443a ("mbuf: support dynamic fields and flags")
Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
---
app/test/test_mbuf.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_dyn.c | 4 ++++
2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
diff --git a/app/test/test_mbuf.c b/app/test/test_mbuf.c
index 9a248dfaea..82777109dc 100644
--- a/app/test/test_mbuf.c
+++ b/app/test/test_mbuf.c
@@ -2577,6 +2577,16 @@ test_mbuf_dyn(struct rte_mempool *pktmbuf_pool)
.align = 3,
.flags = 0,
};
+ const struct rte_mbuf_dynfield dynfield_fail_flag = {
+ .name = "test-dynfield",
+ .size = sizeof(uint8_t),
+ .align = __alignof__(uint8_t),
+ .flags = 1,
+ };
+ const struct rte_mbuf_dynflag dynflag_fail_flag = {
+ .name = "test-dynflag",
+ .flags = 1,
+ };
const struct rte_mbuf_dynflag dynflag = {
.name = "test-dynflag",
.flags = 0,
@@ -2638,6 +2648,14 @@ test_mbuf_dyn(struct rte_mempool *pktmbuf_pool)
if (ret != -1)
GOTO_FAIL("dynamic field creation should fail (not avail)");
+ ret = rte_mbuf_dynfield_register(&dynfield_fail_flag);
+ if (ret != -1)
+ GOTO_FAIL("dynamic field creation should fail (invalid flag)");
+
+ ret = rte_mbuf_dynflag_register(&dynflag_fail_flag);
+ if (ret != -1)
+ GOTO_FAIL("dynamic flag creation should fail (invalid flag)");
+
flag = rte_mbuf_dynflag_register(&dynflag);
if (flag == -1)
GOTO_FAIL("failed to register dynamic flag, flag=%d: %s",
diff --git a/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_dyn.c b/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_dyn.c
index ca46eb279e..d55e162a68 100644
--- a/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_dyn.c
+++ b/lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_dyn.c
@@ -498,6 +498,10 @@ rte_mbuf_dynflag_register_bitnum(const struct rte_mbuf_dynflag *params,
{
int ret;
+ if (params->flags != 0) {
+ rte_errno = EINVAL;
+ return -1;
+ }
if (req >= RTE_SIZEOF_FIELD(struct rte_mbuf, ol_flags) * CHAR_BIT &&
req != UINT_MAX) {
rte_errno = EINVAL;
--
2.23.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: enforce no option for dynamic fields and flags
2021-10-12 19:39 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: enforce no option for dynamic fields and flags David Marchand
@ 2021-10-12 20:14 ` Stephen Hemminger
2021-10-13 7:06 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2021-10-13 8:37 ` Kinsella, Ray
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Hemminger @ 2021-10-12 20:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Marchand; +Cc: dev, mdr, thomas, Olivier Matz, Konstantin Ananyev
On Tue, 12 Oct 2021 21:39:57 +0200
David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> wrote:
> As stated in the API, dynamic field and flags should be created with no
> additional flag (simply in the API for future changes).
>
> Fix the dynamic flag register helper which was not enforcing it and add
> unit tests.
>
> Fixes: 4958ca3a443a ("mbuf: support dynamic fields and flags")
>
> Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: enforce no option for dynamic fields and flags
2021-10-12 20:14 ` Stephen Hemminger
@ 2021-10-13 7:06 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2021-10-15 8:28 ` David Marchand
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Rybchenko @ 2021-10-13 7:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Hemminger, David Marchand
Cc: dev, mdr, thomas, Olivier Matz, Konstantin Ananyev
On 10/12/21 11:14 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Oct 2021 21:39:57 +0200
> David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> As stated in the API, dynamic field and flags should be created with no
>> additional flag (simply in the API for future changes).
>>
>> Fix the dynamic flag register helper which was not enforcing it and add
>> unit tests.
>>
>> Fixes: 4958ca3a443a ("mbuf: support dynamic fields and flags")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
>
> Acked-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
>
Acked-by: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: enforce no option for dynamic fields and flags
2021-10-12 19:39 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: enforce no option for dynamic fields and flags David Marchand
2021-10-12 20:14 ` Stephen Hemminger
@ 2021-10-13 8:37 ` Kinsella, Ray
1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Kinsella, Ray @ 2021-10-13 8:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Marchand, dev; +Cc: thomas, Olivier Matz, Konstantin Ananyev
On 12/10/2021 20:39, David Marchand wrote:
> As stated in the API, dynamic field and flags should be created with no
> additional flag (simply in the API for future changes).
>
> Fix the dynamic flag register helper which was not enforcing it and add
> unit tests.
>
> Fixes: 4958ca3a443a ("mbuf: support dynamic fields and flags")
>
> Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
> ---
> app/test/test_mbuf.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
> lib/mbuf/rte_mbuf_dyn.c | 4 ++++
> 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
Acked-by: Ray Kinsella <mdr@ashroe.eu>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: enforce no option for dynamic fields and flags
2021-10-13 7:06 ` Andrew Rybchenko
@ 2021-10-15 8:28 ` David Marchand
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: David Marchand @ 2021-10-15 8:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Marchand
Cc: Andrew Rybchenko, Stephen Hemminger, dev, Ray Kinsella,
Thomas Monjalon, Olivier Matz, Konstantin Ananyev
On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 9:06 AM Andrew Rybchenko
<andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru> wrote:
> On 10/12/21 11:14 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > On Tue, 12 Oct 2021 21:39:57 +0200
> > David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >> As stated in the API, dynamic field and flags should be created with no
> >> additional flag (simply in the API for future changes).
> >>
> >> Fix the dynamic flag register helper which was not enforcing it and add
> >> unit tests.
> >>
> >> Fixes: 4958ca3a443a ("mbuf: support dynamic fields and flags")
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
> > Acked-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> Acked-by: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
Acked-by: Ray Kinsella <mdr@ashroe.eu>
Applied, thanks.
--
David Marchand
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-10-15 8:28 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-10-12 19:39 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: enforce no option for dynamic fields and flags David Marchand
2021-10-12 20:14 ` Stephen Hemminger
2021-10-13 7:06 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2021-10-15 8:28 ` David Marchand
2021-10-13 8:37 ` Kinsella, Ray
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).