From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D1FC45B01; Thu, 10 Oct 2024 12:15:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79C2440298; Thu, 10 Oct 2024 12:15:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9B604025E for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2024 12:15:09 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1728555309; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=7PKa8vidnvpVbiYhpFq8KZgorUHfMKZ1+IqhxVUhaso=; b=dTzzUYcb5ukaooRXVAy6fxeukTGsKE/wM8Q704cNuFYlVlMimFUeIvbD2TbqMEuXkFjkZH N8MSoW4GUMJLIB5Of3veHIBd/80WybK2R3fK3FOOHM+MpxRr0Y8wjz0Xd3bnXy1r5YanwB rmOutJVzH2bJwW76nW33Z2CDE2PE6bs= Received: from mail-lf1-f69.google.com (mail-lf1-f69.google.com [209.85.167.69]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-99-bVuuHxDmM1y8mhL2drGqDQ-1; Thu, 10 Oct 2024 06:15:08 -0400 X-MC-Unique: bVuuHxDmM1y8mhL2drGqDQ-1 Received: by mail-lf1-f69.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-5389ef4c213so692889e87.3 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2024 03:15:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1728555307; x=1729160107; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=7PKa8vidnvpVbiYhpFq8KZgorUHfMKZ1+IqhxVUhaso=; b=dTBEC4GCQKGSd/v9mVUOMhZ5JdbIYx7JVX+4dUacJCksYf9ch47XqmrxYlSFWqAEHF eCNlh6hH20krFRA5J85tnNdcLF28LgPiP5XTklBvQ8rztiVov8+gLLhkZAOnqPBOtlf6 ZpWMllLd6Fv4AvgO+fF4qaPwaC81YlJcYSS8RUJadvPrxuYaRPEXPmv+GRaO5yE/9N06 4628pw7KtNJveV8C+UK9n+nfgELDqnXezEwQU5pzWik1irvwI8hMKLFH1p7BDNvvM+MY t9K59HEihJgzNKYUKJeyssSUQJsGJ7yxPvcozb8f5hbfhdzvJwE9DVAppTP22IT8Wfx2 /ynA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy1qYlzs5hNveTY4Cg3kxaxovUZ3vrXJxIaFsMfBbrpOQfHjIKh goqv88vEh4qoprr2sSdaIf+TwLqiTUBrk04yM0bZaqIbW8fwc8n7PKGQIUFBkslJpGUzzOqlmpC g4ttmYVeaCCmjPIK0ojDH/GR3uYjjZTJ/c45LktQrnBWCu1lm5J7LK/GqOIOkXQXEnzB1mANsuk pGNnhRaU6zeG33gmY= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:138e:b0:530:ae0a:ab7a with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-539c48c388emr3727418e87.17.1728555306601; Thu, 10 Oct 2024 03:15:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGrx9Bl01/axOje7KrL6k5AOyqSbZOZBN7B5HU2Uv/ET7D96CaW1yvw0LeFS3rVCU72cqYyykVGmDYuW2od84A= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:138e:b0:530:ae0a:ab7a with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-539c48c388emr3727407e87.17.1728555306215; Thu, 10 Oct 2024 03:15:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20240927204742.546164-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20241002183918.161656-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <20241008095027.715b2743@hermes.local> In-Reply-To: <20241008095027.715b2743@hermes.local> From: David Marchand Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2024 12:14:54 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 00/16] Fix allocation bugs and prevent future ones To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: dev@dpdk.org X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On Tue, Oct 8, 2024 at 6:50=E2=80=AFPM Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > On Fri, 4 Oct 2024 16:57:16 +0200 > David Marchand wrote: > > > > > > > It seems v7 lost the last patch that was introducing and using the > > > annotations in rte_malloc. > > > Was there an issue with this patch, or is it just a series submission= issue? > > > > Btw, reading gcc documentation, it seems the check is only enabled > > with -fanalyzer. > > Can we add this in the CI? > > > > If we can't enable all of -fanalyzer checks, maybe go with a subset of > > it, like -Wanalyzer-allocation-size > > -Wanalyzer-mismatching-deallocation ? > > > I didn't enable -fanalyzer in my build, and all these bugs showed up. Ok, there was probably something wrong in my testing earlier. I can see the errors fine now that applied the annotations first... This is a nice tool, let me see if I can get this in for rc1. --=20 David Marchand