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 07149A0524 for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 12:20:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 019851606CC; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 12:20:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-wm1-f49.google.com (mail-wm1-f49.google.com [209.85.128.49]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 926E71606C5 for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 12:20:39 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm1-f49.google.com with SMTP id j21so2907663wmj.0 for ; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 03:20:39 -0800 (PST) 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=hkSHdImZlhInmddAgEANwKHbu09+m+aoMtZphMHRIr4=; b=BEk4gp2pTLdxohLRBxat75bcKbpEQ4/v+vuPPOwzMByZG3lhK37QAjXvB5sHfibN2N dOJNwoE7W+sGnupfeDCIjZKiEydovT61eT5gflam7zWvLjQb0YUDM4sQS+imZGlLeOZg BdReFCycak9DCsTgOUH/OWF0NdiwdK4zauxMukGyCEKF8zYXnyHnQmw4NqWfqS56SUnb YW24cJRAk3Ptp1Q8CNG01WhDCGoLDTjxt6VTWcEhOjn1V00LwQKzvLAdFk79GtF8l4h5 XxZSzban1/GRImsNo+aY8ZbNSF2m/EOqP+XrO72Kdmux/vufrNU+IJjLactM73wLnkQi ZjCw== 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=hkSHdImZlhInmddAgEANwKHbu09+m+aoMtZphMHRIr4=; b=DMNHgK8OxJGtpqx2Iassz23H5FQi8nW4H8CU9UXSR2octALHCq29/onCAMHhbj2xMs Y8xqrjXc8GqS9snszd1V7M4+qjBhqoHb/wza5ZGa18OcotLDjwbPA+d4t/64H6pMqbTI zqUOE4Yh99MNWOfNBpLI4LotchnjXEC1FgcDEzJJuFRD5nOBC18WMcJECwFh/M3x/myn RVR2WK7ZLi+JHhlCT6dEeS7E86IxIdJhhzYEPH6XWig/MDLGl2nfm27QNUoxm7oHC4PC ufYYZKIecgBu0/+MwJDzvvEv016KOsRuISZ25LKO3Z2dWax87BiwXkwKIpIok57OBHMN 7txA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5339tOwTETyT9NwAqq3DMIKhIu6a+L19gDGL2lU50tTpihHp4yhd 2VHektwdOPXPQOn1bnmV/I0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxscvfXBK6JhMWY1vC+GBTL2cmkiCbqleZUBZlWujHfHu/C5httxiIWAKY2cOfYOw+pbw//kg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:154f:: with SMTP id f15mr3105508wmg.20.1612524039318; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 03:20:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([88.98.246.218]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 36sm12513974wrj.97.2021.02.05.03.20.38 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 05 Feb 2021 03:20:38 -0800 (PST) From: luca.boccassi@gmail.com To: Gaetan Rivet Cc: Min Hu , dpdk stable Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2021 11:15:10 +0000 Message-Id: <20210205111920.1272063-24-luca.boccassi@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.29.2 In-Reply-To: <20210205111920.1272063-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com> References: <20210205111920.1272063-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [dpdk-stable] patch 'net/bonding: fix port id validity check on parsing' has been queued to stable release 20.11.1 X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: stable-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "stable" Hi, FYI, your patch has been queued to stable release 20.11.1 Note it hasn't been pushed to http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk-stable yet. It will be pushed if I get no objections before 02/07/21. 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. Queued patches are on a temporary branch at: https://github.com/bluca/dpdk-stable This queued commit can be viewed at: https://github.com/bluca/dpdk-stable/commit/64fdf34d136ecc642bcecb3f133470844e02e33e Thanks. Luca Boccassi --- >From 64fdf34d136ecc642bcecb3f133470844e02e33e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Gaetan Rivet Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 18:42:06 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] net/bonding: fix port id validity check on parsing [ upstream commit 44cd624a4b8c626fb5444199c06b5e05675c3cc1 ] If the port_id is equal to RTE_MAX_ETHPORTS, it should be considered invalid. Additionally, UNUSED ports are also not valid port ids to be used afterward. To simplify following the ethdev API rules, use the exposed function checking whether a port id is valid. Fixes: 2efb58cbab6e ("bond: new link bonding library") Signed-off-by: Gaetan Rivet Acked-by: Min Hu (Connor) --- drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_args.c | 5 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_args.c b/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_args.c index abdf552610..35616fb8bc 100644 --- a/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_args.c +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_args.c @@ -108,9 +108,8 @@ parse_port_id(const char *port_str) } } - if (port_id < 0 || port_id > RTE_MAX_ETHPORTS) { - RTE_BOND_LOG(ERR, "Slave port specified (%s) outside expected range", - port_str); + if (!rte_eth_dev_is_valid_port(port_id)) { + RTE_BOND_LOG(ERR, "Specified port (%s) is invalid", port_str); return -1; } return port_id; -- 2.29.2 --- Diff of the applied patch vs upstream commit (please double-check if non-empty: --- --- - 2021-02-05 11:18:30.380473090 +0000 +++ 0024-net-bonding-fix-port-id-validity-check-on-parsing.patch 2021-02-05 11:18:28.606687304 +0000 @@ -1 +1 @@ -From 44cd624a4b8c626fb5444199c06b5e05675c3cc1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 +From 64fdf34d136ecc642bcecb3f133470844e02e33e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 @@ -5,0 +6,2 @@ +[ upstream commit 44cd624a4b8c626fb5444199c06b5e05675c3cc1 ] + @@ -14 +15,0 @@ -Cc: stable@dpdk.org