From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8426A04C1 for ; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 14:25:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 589342BA2; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 14:25:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65C8C235 for ; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 14:25:25 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1574256324; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=1gsCIc59JWypFiUX7WFU/7EIsyNRJG0rYPvmGfan8h4=; b=IbdUl2aFB17soIvJy7Qe8JnnYXR7UdeSC6nL3RWILIz2j399+huwS5obLXJwaBalHbp3YA ZuMYjtiV3C94pRLJQix0uk8rqFSDE++V1QMLWV6b0HUvKg+tG/cea9yFtNmmR+xuDzFjda ZQEdQQk7aVW/F8xK5hri3OeEFjqLyVQ= Received: from mail-ua1-f71.google.com (mail-ua1-f71.google.com [209.85.222.71]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-398-ofM6WXzbMSqUx_lV_s-M3Q-1; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 08:25:21 -0500 Received: by mail-ua1-f71.google.com with SMTP id j7so5522323uan.11 for ; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 05:25:21 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=WT7vsoj+yTnmishlAS0EsgpKoIVamueg9Xo3/MUO3ks=; b=AAPIaPnvOTkfYLSfOuKxMNEyOQSpMcgMsXkz29MjdinzNHiQWODfm7Z+Nhye/RW5Ur bHbULtmQf4xQ/P2XSFA+NMBHz/6Wf+htWB9Zdyr7sWdJrN2PCCclHdoeo9ACJvYWKy7f 33S3L0byayWOJzTRT8LeQKaMnNeoCT1HdXBhEFvlzGPML+fKEg3R264kXI/9c1JlzA+S 1UmgRblyiVtyE/0UQRq+fZO99CmFS5bvw+M8e9bkYjqK2JBRXbWeAaYbsC8CYcmJvXHE XiWCIYtreVDy/h3gtdUC7uKGEX3SWOuM5avIy6TCBkLZ4QgQhK6LNYULswy7QIhrwnUE BusQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXei1OuGraFGAhxAcjs0y8VfEwu+JlzPLSgvRAxmoIq28fuDK7L hYs0wH2ul/dzIAwYB6o5YaXefH4UPOjCAOq8AyJv+ht6MBCivEbTIGV52EoYItuJzw7LPaL/Vby rL5BmBPe7kOTCOJ3lOVSKlBU= X-Received: by 2002:a67:f3c7:: with SMTP id j7mr1637824vsn.141.1574256320669; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 05:25:20 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxWTGUqhBkR6Sdc4G2CPW6n6XQoda4qU8PvuVrKPKUf4NZpYN/0Vqe9jH4HujrP6iSQiLAjTaImbt3+5bWBAC4= X-Received: by 2002:a67:f3c7:: with SMTP id j7mr1637810vsn.141.1574256320295; Wed, 20 Nov 2019 05:25:20 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1573570228-15676-1-git-send-email-xuemingl@mellanox.com> <1573570228-15676-2-git-send-email-xuemingl@mellanox.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 14:25:09 +0100 Message-ID: To: "Xueming(Steven) Li" Cc: Anatoly Burakov , Asaf Penso , dev , dpdk stable X-MC-Unique: ofM6WXzbMSqUx_lV_s-M3Q-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH 2/2] malloc: fix realloc padded element size 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" On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 3:12 AM Xueming(Steven) Li wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: David Marchand > > Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2019 4:47 AM > > To: Xueming(Steven) Li ; Anatoly Burakov > > > > Cc: Asaf Penso ; dev ; dpdk stable > > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH 2/2] malloc: fix realloc padded eleme= nt > > size > > > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 3:50 PM Xueming Li > > wrote: > > > > > > When resize a memory with next element, the original element size gro= ws. > > > If the orginal element has padding, the real inner element size didn'= t > > > grow as well and this causes trailer verification failure when malloc > > > debug enabled. > > > > I did not see this when running the malloc_autotest with debug enabled. > > What is missing for me to catch it? > > > Yes, it happens rarely, depends on memory fragment. I only caught this in= middle of a long test. > > > > > Just a bit chilly to apply this series. > > The first patch seems an optimisation. > > The second one seems more interesting if we fix the debug mode, but I > > suppose we can live without them in 19.11. > Few people enable memory debug option, they are there for years. Had a discussion offlist with Anatoly. Those two issues are hard to catch but the fixes are relevant and Anatoly is confident. I will take this in rc3. Series applied, thanks. --=20 David Marchand