DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: "Min Hu (Connor)" <humin29@huawei.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, ferruh.yigit@intel.com, anatoly.burakov@intel.com,
	thomas@monjalon.net
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] test: fix division by zero
Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 17:53:54 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YJwIIlI/16a7SYwN@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1619163330-25960-1-git-send-email-humin29@huawei.com>

On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 03:35:30PM +0800, Min Hu (Connor) wrote:
> Variable i is used as a denominator which may be zero, and
> this may result in segmentation fault.
> 
> This patch fixed it.
> 
> Fixes: 948bc3d6d095 ("test: add reciprocal based division")
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> 
> Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humin29@huawei.com>
> ---
>  app/test/test_reciprocal_division_perf.c | 5 +++--
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/app/test/test_reciprocal_division_perf.c b/app/test/test_reciprocal_division_perf.c
> index a7be8aa..2647308 100644
> --- a/app/test/test_reciprocal_division_perf.c
> +++ b/app/test/test_reciprocal_division_perf.c
> @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ test_reciprocal_division_perf(void)
>  					"result %"PRIu64"",
>  					nresult_u64, rresult_u64);
>  			result = 1;
> -			break;
> +			goto err;
>  		}
>  	}
>  
> @@ -182,7 +182,7 @@ test_reciprocal_division_perf(void)
>  					dividend_u64, divisor_u64,
>  					nresult_u64, rresult_u64);
>  			result = 1;
> -			break;
> +			goto err;
>  		}
>  	}
>  	printf("64bit Division results:\n");
> @@ -195,6 +195,7 @@ test_reciprocal_division_perf(void)
>  	printf("Cycles per division(reciprocal) : %3.2f\n",
>  			((double)tot_cyc_r)/i);
>  
> +err:
>  	return result;
>  }
>  
This looks correct as far as it goes, but I believe the same fix is needed
at lines 66 and 106 too.

One other thing I note is that currently the test will move on to the
next test case on failure, due to break, but using the goto will change
that behaviour. Therefore, I wonder if a better fix is to skip the
printouts if i == 0 in each case?

/Bruce

  reply	other threads:[~2021-05-12 16:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-23  7:35 Min Hu (Connor)
2021-05-12 16:53 ` Bruce Richardson [this message]
2021-05-13  1:11   ` Min Hu (Connor)
2021-05-13  1:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Min Hu (Connor)
2021-05-13  8:23   ` Bruce Richardson
2021-05-19  7:20     ` Thomas Monjalon

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=YJwIIlI/16a7SYwN@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com \
    --to=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=anatoly.burakov@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=humin29@huawei.com \
    --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
    /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).