[PATCH v3] app/test: fix stack overflow in lpm6_perf_autotest

[Medvedkin, Vladimir]

Hi Andre,

On 05/03/2025 14:45, Andre Muezerie wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 10:08:33AM +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 07:21:26AM -0800, Andre Muezerie wrote:
>>> Test lpm6_perf_autotest was hitting a stack overflow on Windows
>>> with both MSVC and Clang.
>>>
>>> The fix is to move some of the data from the stack to the heap.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andre Muezerie<andremue at linux.microsoft.com>
>>> ---
>>>   app/test/test_lpm6_perf.c | 13 +++++++++++--
>>>   1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/app/test/test_lpm6_perf.c b/app/test/test_lpm6_perf.c
>>> index 1860a99ed6..59df0a958a 100644
>>> --- a/app/test/test_lpm6_perf.c
>>> +++ b/app/test/test_lpm6_perf.c
>>> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
>>>   
>>>   #include <rte_cycles.h>
>>>   #include <rte_random.h>
>>> +#include <rte_malloc.h>
>>>   #include <rte_memory.h>
>>>   #include <rte_lpm6.h>
>>>   
>>> @@ -117,8 +118,13 @@ test_lpm6_perf(void)
>>>   	total_time = 0;
>>>   	count = 0;
>>>   
>>> -	struct rte_ipv6_addr ip_batch[NUM_IPS_ENTRIES];
>>> -	int32_t next_hops[NUM_IPS_ENTRIES];
>>> +	struct rte_ipv6_addr *ip_batch = rte_calloc("ip_batch",
>>> +			NUM_IPS_ENTRIES, sizeof(struct rte_ipv6_addr), 0);
>>> +	TEST_LPM_ASSERT(ip_batch != NULL);
>>> +
>>> +	int32_t *next_hops = rte_calloc("next_hops",
>>> +			NUM_IPS_ENTRIES, sizeof(int32_t), 0);
>>> +	TEST_LPM_ASSERT(next_hops != NULL);
>>>   
>> While I don't think we need to use the "rte_" versions of allocation, this
>> is still an ok fix - and I see that in v1 regular malloc was used.
> The reviewers had different opinions on which allocator function
> should be used, that's why it was changed. Thanks for being flexible on this.

As I mentioned earlier, I think it's better to use the memory allocated 
from hugepages here since we are measuring performance.

Acked-by: Vladimir Medvedkin <vladimir.medvedkin at intel.com>

>
>> With either calloc or rte_calloc used.
>>
>> Acked-by: Bruce Richardson<bruce.richardson at intel.com>
>>
>>
>>>   	for (i = 0; i < NUM_IPS_ENTRIES; i++)
>>>   		ip_batch[i] = large_ips_table[i].ip;
>>> @@ -153,6 +159,9 @@ test_lpm6_perf(void)
>>>   	printf("Average LPM Delete: %g cycles\n",
>>>   			(double)total_time / NUM_ROUTE_ENTRIES);
>>>   
>>> +	rte_free(next_hops);
>>> +	rte_free(ip_batch);
>>> +
>>>   	rte_lpm6_delete_all(lpm);
>>>   	rte_lpm6_free(lpm);
>>>   
>>> -- 
>>> 2.47.0.vfs.0.3
>>>
-- 
Regards,
Vladimir
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/attachments/20250305/f94ab79e/attachment-0001.htm>