Thanks for the change Dumitru and the suggestion, Ales. Acked-by: Mark Michelson <[email protected]>
I went ahead and pushed this to main and all branches back to branch-24.03. On Mon, Feb 16, 2026 at 10:21 AM Dumitru Ceara via dev <[email protected]> wrote: > > Incremental processing run() callbacks must always move the node to a > valid state (< EN_STATE_MAX). That's always the case but the code was > not explicitly checking for that which caused coverity to come up with > false positive reports like: > > 4. index_parm: Indexing array engine_node_state_name of size 4 with state. > 364 VLOG_DBG("node: %s, old_state %s, new_state %s, reason: %s.", > 365 node->name, engine_node_state_name[node->state], > 366 engine_node_state_name[state], reason); > > To guide the code analysis, add an assertion that fails if that's not > the case. > > Suggested-by: Ales Musil <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Dumitru Ceara <[email protected]> > --- > lib/inc-proc-eng.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/lib/inc-proc-eng.c b/lib/inc-proc-eng.c > index dd06a88c1d..a4b6c8cde3 100644 > --- a/lib/inc-proc-eng.c > +++ b/lib/inc-proc-eng.c > @@ -353,6 +353,8 @@ engine_set_node_state(struct engine_node *node, > enum engine_node_state state, > const char *reason_fmt, ...) > { > + ovs_assert(state < EN_STATE_MAX); > + > if (node->state == state) { > return; > } > -- > 2.52.0 > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
