From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <stable-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124])
by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73C63A046B
for <public@inbox.dpdk.org>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 11:33:28 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C3E71BF79;
Mon, 22 Jul 2019 11:33:28 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20])
by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65F3E1BF48;
Mon, 22 Jul 2019 11:33:23 +0200 (CEST)
X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message)
X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False
Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20])
by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384;
22 Jul 2019 02:33:22 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,294,1559545200"; d="scan'208";a="368461235"
Received: from aburakov-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.220.83])
([10.237.220.83])
by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 Jul 2019 02:33:20 -0700
To: Ogawa Yasufumi <yasufum.o@gmail.com>, david.marchand@redhat.com
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stable@dpdk.org
References: <1555379952-23517-1-git-send-email-ogawa.yasufumi@lab.ntt.co.jp>
<20190711103148.9187-1-yasufum.o@gmail.com>
<20190711103148.9187-2-yasufum.o@gmail.com>
<f86ef9d6-9527-4809-b3a4-1a7c625649fa@intel.com>
<e6dede1b-9d97-979a-a73e-69c658a45a67@gmail.com>
<de96a23b-e3fd-6386-e0a6-c020001d7c5c@intel.com>
<99d2853d-f6f9-59f2-f853-0f9222e8cb5d@gmail.com>
<CAASPJrmKsy+8hZghjq+ti0X5-cOvm+o=LieN5pAL6FYtS7zssg@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
Message-ID: <e49172f2-42b5-3d1e-e21e-229ddc8d2153@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 10:33:20 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAASPJrmKsy+8hZghjq+ti0X5-cOvm+o=LieN5pAL6FYtS7zssg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v3 1/1] fbarray: get fbarrays from
containerized secondary
X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches <stable.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/stable>,
<mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/stable/>
List-Post: <mailto:stable@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/stable>,
<mailto:stable-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: stable-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "stable" <stable-bounces@dpdk.org>
On 22-Jul-19 2:06 AM, Ogawa Yasufumi wrote:
>
>
> 2019年7月12日(金) 11:22 Yasufumi Ogawa <yasufum.o@gmail.com
> <mailto:yasufum.o@gmail.com>>:
>
> On 2019/07/11 22:14, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
> > On 11-Jul-19 12:57 PM, Yasufumi Ogawa wrote:
> >> On 2019/07/11 19:53, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
> >>> On 11-Jul-19 11:31 AM, yasufum.o@gmail.com
> <mailto:yasufum.o@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> From: Yasufumi Ogawa <ogawa.yasufumi@lab.ntt.co.jp
> <mailto:ogawa.yasufumi@lab.ntt.co.jp>>
> >>>>
> >>> <...>
> >>>
> >>>> + if (getpid() == 1) {
> >>>> + FILE *hn_fp;
> >>>> + hn_fp = fopen("/etc/hostname", "r");
> >>>> + if (hn_fp == NULL) {
> >>>> + RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL,
> >>>> + "Cannot open '/etc/hostname' for secondary\n");
> >>>> + return -1;
> >>>> + }
> >>>> +
> >>>> + /* with docker, /etc/hostname just has one entry of
> >>>> hostname */
> >>>> + if (fscanf(hn_fp, "%s", proc_id) == EOF) {
> >>>
> >>> Apologies for not pointing this out earlier, but do i understand
> >>> correctly that there's no bounds checking here, and fscanf() will
> >>> write however many bytes it wants?
> >> I understand "%s" is not appropriate. hostname is 12 bytes char
> and I
> >> thought proc_id[16] is enough, but it is unsafe. In addition,
> hostname
> >> can be defined by user with docker's option, so it should be enough
> >> for user defined name.
> >>
> >> How do you think expecting max 32 chars of hostname and set
> boundary
> >> "%32s" as following?
> >>
> >> proc_id[33]; /* define proc id from hostname less than 33
> bytes. */
> >> ...
> >> if (fscanf(hn_fp, "%32s", proc_id) == EOF) {
> >>
> >
> > As long as it takes NULL-termination into account as well, it
> should be
> > OK. I can't recall off the top of my head if %32s includes NULL
> > terminator (probably not?).
> Do you agree if initialize with NULL chars to ensure proc_id is
> NULL-terminated? As tested on my environment, "%Ns" sets next of Nth
> char as NULL, but it seems more reliable.
> proc_id[33] = { 0 };
>
> Hi Anatoly,
>
> I would like to send v4 patch if it is agreeable.
Yes, please do.
As a side note, you don't need to ask anyone's permission to send a patch :)
>
>
> Yasufumi
>
--
Thanks,
Anatoly