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 9D46FA0C43 for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 09:02:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95EDB40DF5; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 09:02:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AF26410DF for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 09:02:39 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1634626958; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=lS7HLuVISPfo/RjYbuyNwcmq4JOjiiaeUvNVeHHRXk0=; b=OcGZtPUW7bgTzZOxBUlm421rpJh9sjDBD2C89tLawCdCLjuSwJW/2puCKR7rmbUhLDPj72 n84jzlYgBvodudLpeRKS7t3nWYgsWjm5nebhBdnUKRQI1exHUWcXGMHDqOw2T6EC//BMfY G12+GlkaDAp1BtOk2dIJcj/ZppT4Kzo= Received: from mail-lf1-f71.google.com (mail-lf1-f71.google.com [209.85.167.71]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-383-fUOCH4CiNP21qupN8sWl5Q-1; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 03:02:28 -0400 X-MC-Unique: fUOCH4CiNP21qupN8sWl5Q-1 Received: by mail-lf1-f71.google.com with SMTP id p10-20020a056512234a00b003fe188e9960so405566lfu.19 for ; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 00:02:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=lS7HLuVISPfo/RjYbuyNwcmq4JOjiiaeUvNVeHHRXk0=; b=Xh/bPjVa3REWEA3uWQYqbEwJj1xb9sGXy7gBGFzq5HfE+i6HT85oqkU+WIKR2x8o9m ZU75o4/88larSfk0DGTEr7mGj0ZncI5QPng8pK+r7dFZjPMxXTXkwSaI/c3ZZPpfuE4L 0w9g26mgAmNnm9mn9xcAVhph9JQgWHXHz48gAKTHCY+gB5FFpDg/UQAvwkaCgwOqrUyV wlbVnFz7oSSqeevyFSKC9Jjk3kCv9wmw2r8h7c6w/O+Hu4eyBa6KOYO0jvFLgX0C+E5/ 4fX1IVx591BJJS7R6OddzICx0VjPx68x1+z9c5qo76ad16IyJQVjHXHc/DgSAhmsB7cs 7XSA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533H6npSDTiJNzMgBqd7xj3xtvqgN8JL5thr3zKvnh+erNpWrTkH RBsLoyu4C8hSFQaJbm3Ww+lE9J2iQjP1xnPlTwhP4Ux7DzT3wj0BByp+Y2mmwgzjSXTOhw/NeOw r+J0u4KXhkMCLcDxsy5wTx2c= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:b528:: with SMTP id z8mr4859820ljm.55.1634626947140; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 00:02:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwNOYOLcAjJ2pQGerSZL6Bph3TPs9oSK4MIk9Mse0xSEVrfrUapkWy0Ry+T1PnbVm2WVprQ5ia3xabsycKhZDc= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:b528:: with SMTP id z8mr4859801ljm.55.1634626946845; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 00:02:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1634153265-193315-1-git-send-email-vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com> <1634233699-197151-1-git-send-email-vladimir.medvedkin@intel.com> <543fb591-d38a-5573-1bbc-db6a0c624893@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <543fb591-d38a-5573-1bbc-db6a0c624893@intel.com> From: David Marchand Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2021 09:02:15 +0200 Message-ID: To: "Medvedkin, Vladimir" Cc: dev , "Wang, Yipeng1" , "Gobriel, Sameh" , Bruce Richardson , dpdk stable Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dmarchan@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v3] test/hash: fix buffer overflow 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" On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 3:02 PM Medvedkin, Vladimir wrote: > > I am confused. > > Does it mean that rte_jhash_32b is not compliant with rte_hash_create API? > > > > I think so too, because despite the fact that the ABI is the same, the > API remains different with respect to the length argument. Sorry I don't follow you with "ABI is the same". Can you explain please? I am not against the fix, but it seems to test something different than what an application using the hash library would do. Or if an application directly calls this hash function, maybe the unit test should not test it via rte_hash_create (which seems to defeat the abstraction). -- David Marchand