[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] ethdev: check if queue setupped in queue-related APIs
Ferruh Yigit
ferruh.yigit at intel.com
Mon Oct 12 17:12:24 CEST 2020
On 10/12/2020 8:32 AM, Wei Hu (Xavier) wrote:
> From: Chengchang Tang <tangchengchang at huawei.com>
>
> This patch adds checking whether the related Tx or Rx queue has been
> setupped in the queue-related API functions to avoid illegal address
> access. And validity check of the queue_id is also added in the API
> functions rte_eth_dev_rx_intr_enable and rte_eth_dev_rx_intr_disable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chengchang Tang <tangchengchang at huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Wei Hu (Xavier) <xavier.huwei at huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Chengwen Feng <fengchengwen at huawei.com>
> ---
> v2 -> v3:
> don't break lines in format strings.
> v1 -> v2:
> 1. replace %"PRIu16" with %u.
> 2. extact two common functions which validate RXQ/TXQ ids and
> whether it has been set up or not.
> ---
> lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c | 92 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h | 3 +-
> 2 files changed, 78 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
> index 892c246..34eec97 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
> @@ -877,10 +877,59 @@ rte_eth_dev_rx_queue_config(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, uint16_t nb_queues)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static inline int
> +rte_eth_dev_validate_rx_queue(uint16_t port_id, uint16_t rx_queue_id)
> +{
> + struct rte_eth_dev *dev;
> +
> + RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(port_id, -EINVAL);
> +
> + dev = &rte_eth_devices[port_id];
> +
Since these are static (internal) functions, why not get "struct rte_eth_dev
*dev" as parameter and drop the port_id validation?
Also for same reason, although there is not convention around it, what do you
think dropping the 'rte_' prefix from the funcitons names, to prevent them
confused by ethdev APIs?
<...>
> @@ -4721,7 +4721,8 @@ rte_eth_rx_queue_count(uint16_t port_id, uint16_t queue_id)
> RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(port_id, -EINVAL);
> dev = &rte_eth_devices[port_id];
> RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->rx_queue_count, -ENOTSUP);
> - if (queue_id >= dev->data->nb_rx_queues)
> + if (queue_id >= dev->data->nb_rx_queues ||
> + dev->data->rx_queues[queue_id] == NULL)
> return -EINVAL;
This will bring additional check for the datapath, but I guess this check is
reasonable since this is an API.
More information about the dev
mailing list