From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Mrozowicz, SlawomirX" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] examples/qos_meter: fix unchecked return value Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 09:14:55 +0000 Message-ID: <158888A50F43E34AAE179517F56C97455A4884@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1462783091-2538-1-git-send-email-slawomirx.mrozowicz@intel.com> <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D89126479BAFA7@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "Singh, Jasvinder" To: "Dumitrescu, Cristian" Return-path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FF7D9ACD for ; Wed, 11 May 2016 11:14:58 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D89126479BAFA7@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" >-----Original Message----- >From: Dumitrescu, Cristian >Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 7:42 PM >To: Mrozowicz, SlawomirX >Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Singh, Jasvinder >Subject: RE: [PATCH v3] examples/qos_meter: fix unchecked return value > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mrozowicz, SlawomirX >> Sent: Monday, May 9, 2016 9:38 AM >> To: Dumitrescu, Cristian >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Singh, Jasvinder ; >> Mrozowicz, SlawomirX >> Subject: [PATCH v3] examples/qos_meter: fix unchecked return value >> >> Fix issue reported by Coverity. >> >> Coverity ID 30693: Unchecked return value >> check_return: Calling rte_meter_srtcm_config without checking return >> value. >> >> Fixes: e6541fdec8b2 ("meter: initial import") >> >> Signed-off-by: Slawomir Mrozowicz >> --- >> examples/qos_meter/main.c | 15 ++++++++++----- >> examples/qos_meter/main.h | 2 +- >> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/examples/qos_meter/main.c b/examples/qos_meter/main.c >> index b968b00..7c69606 100644 >> --- a/examples/qos_meter/main.c >> +++ b/examples/qos_meter/main.c >> @@ -133,14 +133,17 @@ struct rte_meter_trtcm_params >app_trtcm_params[] >> =3D { >> >> FLOW_METER app_flows[APP_FLOWS_MAX]; >> >> -static void >> +static int >> app_configure_flow_table(void) >> { >> uint32_t i, j; >> + int ret =3D 0; >> >> - for (i =3D 0, j =3D 0; i < APP_FLOWS_MAX; i ++, j =3D (j + 1) % >> RTE_DIM(PARAMS)){ >> - FUNC_CONFIG(&app_flows[i], &PARAMS[j]); >> - } >> + for (i =3D 0, j =3D 0; i < APP_FLOWS_MAX && ret =3D=3D 0; >> + i ++, j =3D (j + 1) % RTE_DIM(PARAMS)) >> + ret =3D FUNC_CONFIG(&app_flows[i], &PARAMS[j]); >> + >> + return ret; >> } > >This is only returns the configuration status for the last flow and leaves >undetected an error for any other flow. Why not check the status for each >flow and return an error on first occurrence? >For (...){ret =3D FUNC_CONFIG(...); if (ret) return ret;} > This code check status of the function FUNC_CONFIG for each flow and return= an error on first occurrence. Rest of functions FUNC_CONFIG are not calle= d. See terminate condition of the loop. >> >> static inline void >> @@ -381,7 +384,9 @@ main(int argc, char **argv) >> rte_eth_promiscuous_enable(port_tx); >> >> /* App configuration */ >> - app_configure_flow_table(); >> + ret =3D app_configure_flow_table(); >> + if (ret < 0) >> + rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, "Invalid configure flow table\n"); >> >> /* Launch per-lcore init on every lcore */ >> rte_eal_mp_remote_launch(main_loop, NULL, CALL_MASTER); diff -- >git >> a/examples/qos_meter/main.h b/examples/qos_meter/main.h index >> 530bf69..54867dc 100644 >> --- a/examples/qos_meter/main.h >> +++ b/examples/qos_meter/main.h >> @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ enum policer_action >> policer_table[e_RTE_METER_COLORS][e_RTE_METER_COLORS] =3D #if >APP_MODE >> =3D=3D APP_MODE_FWD >> >> #define FUNC_METER(a,b,c,d) color, flow_id=3Dflow_id, pkt_len=3Dpkt_len= , >> time=3Dtime -#define FUNC_CONFIG(a,b) >> +#define FUNC_CONFIG(a, b) 0 >> #define PARAMS app_srtcm_params >> #define FLOW_METER int >> >> -- >> 1.9.1