Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] ethdev: add sanity checks in control APIs

["Min Hu (Connor)" <humin29@huawei.com>]

Hi, Thanks Andrew,
	All has been fixed in v3, please review it, thanks.

在 2021/4/13 16:44, Andrew Rybchenko 写道:
> On 4/13/21 6:22 AM, Min Hu (Connor) wrote:
>> This patch adds more sanity checks in control path APIs.
>>
>> Fixes: 214ed1acd125 ("ethdev: add iterator to match devargs input")
>> Fixes: 3d98f921fbe9 ("ethdev: unify prefix for static functions and variables")
>> Fixes: 0366137722a0 ("ethdev: check for invalid device name")
>> Fixes: d948f596fee2 ("ethdev: fix port data mismatched in multiple process model")
>> Fixes: 5b7ba31148a8 ("ethdev: add port ownership")
>> Fixes: f8244c6399d9 ("ethdev: increase port id range")
>> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
> 
> Many thanks for working on it. Few notes below.
> 
> [snip]
> 
>> diff --git a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
>> index 6b5cfd6..e1655b5 100644
>> --- a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
>> +++ b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
>> @@ -678,6 +684,9 @@ rte_eth_dev_owner_set(const uint16_t port_id,
>>   {
>>   	int ret;
>>   
>> +	if (owner == NULL)
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +
> 
> Here and in many-many cases below I think the order of checks
> is important in cases when different error codes are returned.
> When there is no any very good reasons why arguments should
> be checked in different order, arguments should be checked in
> order specified in function prototype. In this cases (and many
> cases below), port_id should be checked first.
> 
> In this particular case it means that the pointer check
> should be done in a static helper function.
> 
> One more point is error logging in the case of failure.
> Right now I'd use RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR, ...). May be later we'll
> find out that some of messages should be made INFO or DEBUG.
> Something like:
>     RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR, "Failed to set ethdev port %u owner to NULL\n",
> port_id);
> 
> I'm not 100% sure in format, but my requirements are:
>   - log messages should be unique
>   - log messages should be human readable (i.e. I'd avoid
>     usage of function name)
>   - log messages should provide enough information to understand
>     what went wrong and provide context (basically it correlates
>     with uniqueness requirement)
> 
> @Thomas, @Ferruh, what do you think? It would be good if we
> reach an argement before mass changes are done?
> 
>> @@ -2491,6 +2515,12 @@ rte_eth_tx_done_cleanup(uint16_t port_id, uint16_t queue_id, uint32_t free_cnt)
>>   	RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(port_id, -ENODEV);
>>   	RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->tx_done_cleanup, -ENOTSUP);
>>   
>> +	if (queue_id >= dev->data->nb_tx_queues) {
>> +		RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR, "Queue id should be < %u.",
>> +			       dev->data->nb_tx_queues);
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +	}
>> +
> 
> I'm not 100% sure that it is a control path.
> 
>>   	/* Call driver to free pending mbufs. */
>>   	ret = (*dev->dev_ops->tx_done_cleanup)(dev->data->tx_queues[queue_id],
>>   					       free_cnt);
> 
> [snip]
> .
>