From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by dpdk.space (Postfix) with ESMTP id B341EA0096 for ; Thu, 9 May 2019 13:25:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A625B49E0; Thu, 9 May 2019 13:25:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63EE849E0; Thu, 9 May 2019 13:25:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA65C2572A; Thu, 9 May 2019 07:25:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 09 May 2019 07:25:42 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=T2u9YpuvPWXitcpPXFFas4b+yOPZUoTf4GRtfWaYkgY=; b=W0lmHdH6W481 OI7FC77bxc/mgD6T5p0rHYWDdgqD0vvzX3rpn28jAhNZGUOuBD+k9OoVdq2tw5R8 5VhEauadeS7z7/iAMZ7Aj/LegBRiBVA0SeVeuhlPwk/VedbgdVIPDNi2wNMNeJZo klTARgtNVBooClAJOdEZjaJZWGYJ2tw= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=T2u9YpuvPWXitcpPXFFas4b+yOPZUoTf4GRtfWaYk gY=; b=0ZL6oSpcczMQvWE8eBo2BgCDhVwWkn8O1ZI/vV5gC3HW7987koj7Z8esa KUiICHhzH+qG3DNrObfxD9Vrk9pODM+tWPqlA2DoJk5xObrg5Fi8YKvIze1145zw RoBnS3Cbcj7REpV/JJ3lDhRMYuBW/2s7Qgi6G9FTi4PEEuTAc7xfXmQ26kNDCLSF /yPfKK+86SRlr+6awN2v/y0/xpb3ggXDc4oK4d4hdgGf9SRiw6JQ/64N+rePIbMC syRpIbs3VgW1BMwdf83SFBDiRE8G0BcBOdj9dY2cljH5pzUHlz7Ys3y18nga18m1 sd047CosyxW6npKSpylvUs9mvQgAA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduuddrkeehgdegudcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthhqredttddtjeenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucfkph epjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhho mhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C3E96103CF; Thu, 9 May 2019 07:25:40 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: =?utf-8?B?6IOh5p6X5biG?= Cc: Dharmik Thakkar , stable@dpdk.org, Yipeng Wang , Sameh Gobriel , Bruce Richardson , Pablo de Lara , dev@dpdk.org, honnappa.nagarahalli@arm.com Date: Thu, 09 May 2019 13:25:38 +0200 Message-ID: <3714892.DAfdNftnfW@xps> In-Reply-To: <23fbf768.fdd0.16a9c2dda1e.Coremail.zhongdahulinfan@163.com> References: <20190508165121.20471-1-dharmik.thakkar@arm.com> <4921822.WgiOyE7Pmt@xps> <23fbf768.fdd0.16a9c2dda1e.Coremail.zhongdahulinfan@163.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2 1/2] hash: fix bugs in 'free key with position' X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 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" 09/05/2019 12:40, =E8=83=A1=E6=9E=97=E5=B8=86: > This bug makes 'lock free reader/writer concurrency hash' unusable. > There are two reasons: > 1] memory leak because we cannot free keys which indexes greater than the= number of total entries >=20 > 2] the ring of free_slots may have unexpected key conflict with in use one >=20 > The patch fixes these 2 issues, both of which are in the same API: >=20 > int __rte_experimental > rte_hash_free_key_with_position(const struct rte_hash *h, > const int32_t position) >=20 > I don't think it is necessarily to split in 2 patches. Sorry for insisting, I think it is necessary to split in 2 patches with better explanations in the commit logs. Then we'll need approval from the maintainers. PS1: Please provide your full name in english alphabet PS2: Please do not top-post > At 2019-05-09 16:29:56, "Thomas Monjalon" wrote: > >09/05/2019 00:59, Dharmik Thakkar: > >> This patch fixes 2 bugs- > >> 1] Incorrect position returned to the free slots. > >> 2] Incorrect computation of total_entries > > > >Is it possible to split in 2 patches? > > > >How critical is this bug? It looks old. > >I'm afraid it will miss 19.05.