From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <stable-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124])
by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EC24A0093
for <public@inbox.dpdk.org>; Tue, 19 May 2020 15:12:55 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 357EF1D702;
Tue, 19 May 2020 15:12:55 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail-wm1-f66.google.com (mail-wm1-f66.google.com
[209.85.128.66]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B8AF1D702
for <stable@dpdk.org>; Tue, 19 May 2020 15:12:52 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-wm1-f66.google.com with SMTP id w64so3493211wmg.4
for <stable@dpdk.org>; Tue, 19 May 2020 06:12:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references
:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=J/X74XGs34G36UdTqKx7QM6/CZqk0vG8Q5HZBajC31c=;
b=foqEKFKF94VY1zjc5yAUhbFCfruPj6pbfT9w17PxJVYTjjvW4ROTWYdbiCD9xyuJPw
CUPyibjecvR2vK2SgUH48ZenCj2h4pue5hA9Q5scQzQ5a7Qfo4DppIqKeeUPBhLwI+N4
aOM1Cp+DWjSwbFxT6HwNY1r9dK7fP62oelRzVh7HyicX6lmslEaiSMe0dlchsmYA6+tQ
GwQolj3P+j2qM6cyBb15AJwl9zIHGk970TXnZ5dbxIywwKhdwsI0J5i9NT/bkaiF/yi3
UMRpiK6bVPLVPKEcAYCIvuxAWNlpwTB9mD1kGkikabmGikLeVBrMZtAN2ODAjTUW036H
WRSQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to
:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=J/X74XGs34G36UdTqKx7QM6/CZqk0vG8Q5HZBajC31c=;
b=D58YJYllrS3HJzVHYlWFTk1yQUYWlq8uA0BZaRf3YplmF19T1XJP0xg4fdrjkvHVmM
ChFplMqIZgxR61hnBKfYVrlI5w90cFVRZA3IVzi2D/90Pxznxum8sZfqpkrVyicq7D8S
TTQBanqmZL5Jea/qeRuO3oEKdWL8E7YqxF24NbF05fmUaSut4oNwqyEAbskRau0Ghot1
bA/4m3sw1ZBqerYhZsedZbPiQJaJbbLRoyAhfLD/UMmjsWJDJc6f9hrOMVbRPgn/iyEl
4GHCZBDHRahSSD9flDzf8QqO0VAWnjIUjq1gJ0KwlB6hRHKeZlURVIaY7Q1YnPCopaxL
YbFg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533n+Z0+T2PLEhk8i/+hs0v/a1cQI+3uJuTJ/C3/11h48/ZfjyM9
5itIuaKbfLXKctojXCIfLrU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwTB1A+yepBreFKlVxXznWhNsB+GEEO2e5XZgHUl0Punwkr4Pc6TT59QrCJzzlubhSBd/B/rA==
X-Received: by 2002:a7b:cb13:: with SMTP id u19mr5371289wmj.86.1589893971777;
Tue, 19 May 2020 06:12:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([88.98.246.218])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v126sm4100566wmb.4.2020.05.19.06.12.50
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Tue, 19 May 2020 06:12:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: luca.boccassi@gmail.com
To: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>
Cc: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
dpdk stable <stable@dpdk.org>
Date: Tue, 19 May 2020 14:04:27 +0100
Message-Id: <20200519130549.112823-132-luca.boccassi@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.20.1
In-Reply-To: <20200519130549.112823-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com>
References: <20200519125804.104349-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com>
<20200519130549.112823-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: [dpdk-stable] patch 'examples/ipsec-gw: fix gcc 10
maybe-uninitialized warning' has been queued to stable
release 19.11.3
X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches <stable.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/stable>,
<mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/stable/>
List-Post: <mailto:stable@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/stable>,
<mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: stable-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "stable" <stable-bounces@dpdk.org>
Hi,
FYI, your patch has been queued to stable release 19.11.3
Note it hasn't been pushed to http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk-stable yet.
It will be pushed if I get no objections before 05/21/20. So please
shout if anyone has objections.
Also note that after the patch there's a diff of the upstream commit vs the
patch applied to the branch. This will indicate if there was any rebasing
needed to apply to the stable branch. If there were code changes for rebasing
(ie: not only metadata diffs), please double check that the rebase was
correctly done.
Thanks.
Luca Boccassi
---
>From 274dec754807019cbc8c3c063e5a5b0b46b2f1d7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 11:33:00 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] examples/ipsec-gw: fix gcc 10 maybe-uninitialized warning
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
[ upstream commit f8afd2924753b7fbc9e28771277928ac1d6fb4a7 ]
gcc 10.0.1 reports:
../examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec_process.c: In function ‘ipsec_process’:
../examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec_process.c:132:34:
error: ‘grp.m’ may be used uninitialized in this function
[-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
132 | grp[n].cnt = pkts + i - grp[n].m;
| ~~~~~~^~
This is a correct warning for the initial execution of the statement.
However, it is the design of the loop that grp[0].cnt will later be
written with the correct value using an initialized grp[0].m before it
is used.
In order to remove the warning, initialize grp[0].m for the initial and
unused calculation of grp[0].cnt.
Fixes: 3e5f4625dc17 ("examples/ipsec-secgw: make data-path to use IPsec library")
Suggested-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
---
examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec_process.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec_process.c b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec_process.c
index 2eb5c8b345..37f406d46c 100644
--- a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec_process.c
+++ b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec_process.c
@@ -125,6 +125,7 @@ sa_group(void *sa_ptr[], struct rte_mbuf *pkts[],
void * const nosa = &spi;
sa = nosa;
+ grp[0].m = pkts;
for (i = 0, n = 0; i != num; i++) {
if (sa != sa_ptr[i]) {
--
2.20.1
---
Diff of the applied patch vs upstream commit (please double-check if non-empty:
---
--- - 2020-05-19 14:04:49.833263858 +0100
+++ 0132-examples-ipsec-gw-fix-gcc-10-maybe-uninitialized-war.patch 2020-05-19 14:04:44.444652506 +0100
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-From f8afd2924753b7fbc9e28771277928ac1d6fb4a7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From 274dec754807019cbc8c3c063e5a5b0b46b2f1d7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 11:33:00 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] examples/ipsec-gw: fix gcc 10 maybe-uninitialized warning
@@ -6,6 +6,8 @@
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
+[ upstream commit f8afd2924753b7fbc9e28771277928ac1d6fb4a7 ]
+
gcc 10.0.1 reports:
../examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec_process.c: In function ‘ipsec_process’:
@@ -24,7 +26,6 @@
unused calculation of grp[0].cnt.
Fixes: 3e5f4625dc17 ("examples/ipsec-secgw: make data-path to use IPsec library")
-Cc: stable@dpdk.org
Suggested-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>
@@ -34,10 +35,10 @@
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec_process.c b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec_process.c
-index bb2f2b82da..6d3a3c9a1b 100644
+index 2eb5c8b345..37f406d46c 100644
--- a/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec_process.c
+++ b/examples/ipsec-secgw/ipsec_process.c
-@@ -126,6 +126,7 @@ sa_group(void *sa_ptr[], struct rte_mbuf *pkts[],
+@@ -125,6 +125,7 @@ sa_group(void *sa_ptr[], struct rte_mbuf *pkts[],
void * const nosa = &spi;
sa = nosa;