DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: <dev@dpdk.org>, Chengwen Feng <fengchengwen@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] argparse: improve handling of multi-instance args
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 10:53:20 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aF5qECJgWupF4Er7@bricha3-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aFUfX05kEUNz5k2S@bricha3-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com>

On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 09:44:15AM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 11:49:40AM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > Coverity (correctly) identified an issue[1] where, after the recent
> > rework[2], the internal flag, used by argparse to track what arguments
> > were previously encountered or not, was out of range for the type and no
> > longer having any effect. Fixing this flag to be back into range then,
> > somewhat surprisingly, caused a number of unit test failures to occur.
> > 
> > The reason for these failures is that the tracking of args encountered
> > is done via setting an internal flag on the user-passed arguments
> > object. In the unit tests, this caused issues where the flags field was
> > not getting properly reset between calls to the parse operation. [This
> > is only an issue after the rework, because previously information like
> > param type and optionality was encoded in the flags, so they were more
> > often reset during testing].
> > 
> > Rather than fixing the tests directly to always reset the flags, which
> > is simply working around the issue IMHO, this patchset instead fixes the
> > issue in a more user-friendly way by changing the library to never
> > modify the user-passed structure - making it completely safe to reuse
> > across multiple calls. This is done in the first two patches.
> > 
> > The final, third patch, adds an additional unit test to check that the
> > tracking of flags being seen or not, and the handling of the
> > "RTE_ARGPARSE_FLAG_SUPPORT_MULTI" flag is correct. This closes a gap in
> > testing, since the original issue of the flag being out-of-range should
> > have been caught in testing, rather than having to rely on coverity.
> > 
> > [1] Coverity Issue: 470190
> > [2] https://github.com/DPDK/dpdk/commit/04acc21beeeb78477b15a3f497d3628fd70a6a9f
> > 
> > Bruce Richardson (3):
> >   argparse: track parsed arguments internally
> >   argparse: mark parameter struct as const
> >   test/argparse: add test for repeated arguments
> > 
> Hi Chengwen,
> 
> ping for review. I think this bug should be fixed for RC2.
> 

Second ping! This patchset (indirectly) fixes an issue in the library, so
should be included in the release. Can you please review?

Thanks,
/Bruce

  reply	other threads:[~2025-06-27  9:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-16 10:49 Bruce Richardson
2025-06-16 10:49 ` [PATCH 1/3] argparse: track parsed arguments internally Bruce Richardson
2025-06-16 10:49 ` [PATCH 2/3] argparse: mark parameter struct as const Bruce Richardson
2025-06-16 10:49 ` [PATCH 3/3] test/argparse: add test for repeated arguments Bruce Richardson
2025-06-20  8:44 ` [PATCH 0/3] argparse: improve handling of multi-instance args Bruce Richardson
2025-06-27  9:53   ` Bruce Richardson [this message]
2025-06-27 10:36     ` Thomas Monjalon
2025-06-24 14:16 ` Bruce Richardson

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=aF5qECJgWupF4Er7@bricha3-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com \
    --to=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=fengchengwen@huawei.com \
    /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).