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 231FCA0C3F for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 11:08:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BFAB410E9; Tue, 11 May 2021 11:08:42 +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 C7EDE4003E for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 11:08:40 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1620724120; 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=h3y4qxEKV40Duf9dMSPK2Ts9QcJqoX2j1QVNq+3dCbI=; b=brjq8bZ8ENzdpCwY3cF3+AjGDJ9iO5G8MnxF8d1Zw0VQEwlcMjHgLLOMRJZfelS+2geQ5V BDIVdb2Gxt+gp7dmvbFyZEZPpcJ33LBWzaADg2NdtQ6pVH+5XCIdB67wK++eZoc+0bNAoL +6xrXJsd0Hons3xUHzoMkcuJqHvESlk= Received: from mail-wm1-f72.google.com (mail-wm1-f72.google.com [209.85.128.72]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-497-5ZCVVIEVPO-7nMpT01IEqg-1; Tue, 11 May 2021 05:08:36 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 5ZCVVIEVPO-7nMpT01IEqg-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f72.google.com with SMTP id g199-20020a1c9dd00000b02901355dd71edaso780241wme.7 for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 02:08:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:to:cc:references:from:subject:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=h3y4qxEKV40Duf9dMSPK2Ts9QcJqoX2j1QVNq+3dCbI=; b=gi0UQ+56179ecXuZ2IkXBEMkODbYH/MqbObET+WO7cz07AP0fbmPPINr2Rb2uMhCsk chal8Bve/CagRAcCNKYyuRwAjr46ClAe6d8n2RLxixmGTqJI3Y9ADXmfuEKV4AMV+wRd IOxa0iENV7LeVHcJORILz6arhLXf47ZzXS1tP86knHhDtsUPR7/lmj8z2vyHCEEXaLFa xbO+q1oYMxRocK50a7kNTIZRJ2NYNXMcHByyAb8mhp52LY2b60CLU8106y0UFyaMzB3J A9DCV1Xv/OS3wpJVuhceuTdS83DKXzRo8o+5eIPP23CqZJD4h2dW7wCq5p9H9Dw9css0 SEtA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531u0/Dae2JlBAjXR2KBkrpLGB6lH/doGYh15kIhVAGUftB8Vn+8 znv+HJ52LgMemYYUlcBJx/KMpxolyq2PYmnEX2dEXuDLAuX90U5YQrc6rT4WdSyY/6FIh5qthp0 octYmW7k= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6484:: with SMTP id o4mr35525538wri.8.1620724115085; Tue, 11 May 2021 02:08:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwZcRm38ErGlAmw+5Tqof34MLlXrSnQLJKJTp2UmS5NDohwyxe4WQQ1WJf0m/jHU8oZzmWsPA== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6484:: with SMTP id o4mr35525512wri.8.1620724114837; Tue, 11 May 2021 02:08:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.36] ([78.18.27.43]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z66sm3237061wmc.4.2021.05.11.02.08.33 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 11 May 2021 02:08:34 -0700 (PDT) To: Ferruh Yigit , "Wang, Haiyue" , "Yang, Qiming" , "Zhang, Qi Z" , "Stillwell Jr, Paul M" , "Lu, Wenzhuo" , "Rong, Leyi" , "Shukla, Shivanshu" Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "stable@dpdk.org" , Ajit Khaparde References: <20210510150319.1496105-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <20210510150319.1496105-3-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> From: Kevin Traynor Message-ID: Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 10:08:33 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=ktraynor@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/4] net/ice/base: fix build with gcc11 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 10/05/2021 18:28, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 5/10/2021 6:04 PM, Wang, Haiyue wrote: >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: dev On Behalf Of Ferruh Yigit >>> Sent: Monday, May 10, 2021 23:03 >>> To: Yang, Qiming ; Zhang, Qi Z ; Stillwell Jr, Paul M >>> ; Lu, Wenzhuo ; Rong, Leyi ; >>> Shukla, Shivanshu >>> Cc: Yigit, Ferruh ; dev@dpdk.org; stable@dpdk.org; Kevin Traynor >>> ; Ajit Khaparde >>> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/4] net/ice/base: fix build with gcc11 >>> >>> Reproduced with '--buildtype=debugoptimized' config, >>> compiler version: gcc (GCC) 12.0.0 20210509 (experimental) >>> >>> There are multiple build errors, like: >>> ../drivers/net/ice/base/ice_switch.c: In function ‘ice_add_marker_act’: >>> ../drivers/net/ice/base/ice_switch.c:3727:15: >>> warning: array subscript ‘struct ice_aqc_sw_rules_elem[0]’ >>> is partly outside array bounds of ‘unsigned char[52]’ >>> [-Warray-bounds] >>> 3727 | lg_act->type = CPU_TO_LE16(ICE_AQC_SW_RULES_T_LG_ACT); >>> | ^~ >>> In file included from ../drivers/net/ice/base/ice_type.h:52, >>> from ../drivers/net/ice/base/ice_common.h:8, >>> from ../drivers/net/ice/base/ice_switch.h:8, >>> from ../drivers/net/ice/base/ice_switch.c:5: >>> ../drivers/net/ice/base/ice_osdep.h:209:29: >>> note: referencing an object of size 52 allocated by ‘rte_zmalloc’ >>> 209 | #define ice_malloc(h, s) rte_zmalloc(NULL, s, 0) >>> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> ../drivers/net/ice/base/ice_switch.c:3720:50: >>> note: in expansion of macro ‘ice_malloc’ >>> lg_act = (struct ice_aqc_sw_rules_elem *)ice_malloc(hw, rules_size); >>> >>> These errors are mainly because allocated memory is cast to >>> "struct ice_aqc_sw_rules_elem *" but allocated size is less than the size >>> of "struct ice_aqc_sw_rules_elem". >>> >>> "struct ice_aqc_sw_rules_elem" has multiple other structs has unions, >>> based on which one is used allocated memory being less than the size of >>> "struct ice_aqc_sw_rules_elem" is logically correct but compiler is >>> complaining about it. >>> >>> As a solution making sure allocated memory size is at least size of >>> "struct ice_aqc_sw_rules_elem". >>> The function to use the struct is 'ice_aq_sw_rules()', and it already has >>> parameter for size of the rule, allocating more than needed shouldn't >>> cause any problem. >>> Bugzilla ID: 678 >>> Fixes: c7dd15931183 ("net/ice/base: add virtual switch code") >>> Fixes: 02acdce2f553 ("net/ice/base: add MAC filter with marker and counter") >>> Fixes: f89aa3affa9e ("net/ice/base: support removing advanced rule") >>> Cc: stable@dpdk.org >>> If I apply on head of dpdk-next-net on F34 I still get some of these warnings in ice. I'm using 'meson --werror -Dtests=false build'. $ gcc --version gcc (GCC) 11.1.1 20210428 (Red Hat 11.1.1-1) >>> Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit >>> --- >>> Cc: paul.m.stillwell.jr@intel.com >>> Cc: qi.z.zhang@intel.com >>> Cc: leyi.rong@intel.com >>> Cc: Kevin Traynor >>> Cc: Ajit Khaparde >>> --- >>> drivers/net/ice/base/ice_switch.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++------- >>> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> >> GCC bug ? >> >> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98266 >> >> Bug 98266 - [11 Regression] bogus array subscript is partly outside array bounds on virtual inheritance This gcc defect is fixed in PR middle-end/98266 which was first in in 11.0.1-0.2 [1]. Currently Fedora 34 uses 11.1.1-1 and includes this PR. [1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gcc/blob/rawhide/f/gcc.spec#_3246 >> > > I am not sure if this is a gcc defect. > > Here there is a memory allocated and assigned to "struct ice_aqc_sw_rules_elem > *", but allocated memory size is less than the struct size. As far as I > understand this is the reason of compiler warning. > > For this case it may not be problem logically since both who allocates memory > and who uses the memory follows a contract, but there is a mismatch between > pointer type and object. If some other function wants to access all fields of > the struct, it will be out of bound access. > > > >