DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: nd <nd@arm.com>,
	Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>,
	nd <nd@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/4] ring: future proof flag settings
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 18:07:15 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <DBBPR08MB4646EF5249C0EB15DB48CFED98D00@DBBPR08MB4646.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200424171536.11535-2-stephen@networkplumber.org>

<snip>

> 
> All API's should check that they support the flag values passed.
> These checks ensure that the extra bits can safely be used without risk of ABI
> breakage.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> ---
>  lib/librte_ring/rte_ring.c | 10 ++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/librte_ring/rte_ring.c b/lib/librte_ring/rte_ring.c index
> ebe5ccf0de68..70685121581f 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_ring/rte_ring.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_ring/rte_ring.c
> @@ -42,6 +42,9 @@ static struct rte_tailq_elem rte_ring_tailq = {  };
>  EAL_REGISTER_TAILQ(rte_ring_tailq)
> 
> +/* mask of all valid flag values to ring_create() */
> +#define RING_F_MASK	0x007F
Is it better to construct this using the actual flag #defines?

> +
>  /* true if x is a power of 2 */
>  #define POWEROF2(x) ((((x)-1) & (x)) == 0)
> 
> @@ -197,6 +200,13 @@ rte_ring_init(struct rte_ring *r, const char *name,
> unsigned count,
>  	RTE_BUILD_BUG_ON(offsetof(struct rte_ring_headtail, tail) !=
>  		offsetof(struct rte_ring_rts_headtail, tail.val.pos));
> 
> +	/* future proof flags, only allow supported values */
> +	if (flags & ~RING_F_MASK) {
> +		RTE_LOG(ERR, RING,
> +			"Unsupported flags requested %#x\n", flags);
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +	}
> +
>  	/* init the ring structure */
>  	memset(r, 0, sizeof(*r));
>  	ret = strlcpy(r->name, name, sizeof(r->name));
> --
> 2.20.1


  reply	other threads:[~2020-04-24 18:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-02-12 23:08 [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/4] Enforce flag checking in API's Stephen Hemminger
2020-02-12 23:08 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 1/4] ring: future proof flag settings Stephen Hemminger
2020-02-13 11:12   ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-02-12 23:08 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 2/4] hash: check flags on creation Stephen Hemminger
2020-02-12 23:08 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 3/4] stack: " Stephen Hemminger
2020-02-12 23:08 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 4/4] cfgfile: check flags value Stephen Hemminger
2020-04-24 17:15 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/4] enforce checking on flag values in API's Stephen Hemminger
2020-04-24 17:15   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/4] ring: future proof flag settings Stephen Hemminger
2020-04-24 18:07     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli [this message]
2020-04-24 19:02       ` Stephen Hemminger
2020-04-25  9:20         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-04-24 17:15   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/4] hash: check flags on creation Stephen Hemminger
2020-04-24 17:15   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/4] stack: " Stephen Hemminger
2020-04-24 17:15   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/4] cfgfile: check flags value Stephen Hemminger
2020-04-27 23:16 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/4] Enforce checking on flag values in API's Stephen Hemminger
2020-04-27 23:16   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/4] ring: future proof flag settings Stephen Hemminger
2020-04-28  4:12     ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-04-27 23:16   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/4] hash: check flags on creation Stephen Hemminger
2020-04-29  1:08     ` Wang, Yipeng1
2020-04-27 23:16   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/4] stack: " Stephen Hemminger
2020-05-02  2:36     ` Eads, Gage
2020-04-27 23:16   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 4/4] cfgfile: check flags value Stephen Hemminger
2020-04-28 10:24     ` Bruce Richardson
2020-04-28 10:28   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/4] Enforce checking on flag values in API's Bruce Richardson
2020-06-16 15:47     ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-04-28 11:04   ` Ananyev, Konstantin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=DBBPR08MB4646EF5249C0EB15DB48CFED98D00@DBBPR08MB4646.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=nd@arm.com \
    --cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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).