On 12/22/21 10:46, Eelco Chaudron wrote:
> 
> 
> On 21 Dec 2021, at 16:31, Aaron Conole wrote:
> 
>> Dumitru Ceara <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>>> UB Sanitizer reports:
>>>   lib/bfd.c:748:16: runtime error: member access within misaligned address 
>>> 0x000001f0d6ea for type 'struct msg', which requires 4 byte alignment
>>>   0x000001f0d6ea: note: pointer points here
>>>    00 20  00 00 20 40 03 18 93 f9  0a 6e 00 00 00 00 00 0f  42 40 00 0f 42 
>>> 40 00 00  00 00 cc 00 00 00
>>>                 ^
>>>       #0 0x59008e in bfd_process_packet lib/bfd.c:748
>>>       #1 0x52a240 in process_special ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:3370
>>>       #2 0x553452 in xlate_actions ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:7766
>>>       #3 0x4fc9e6 in upcall_xlate ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c:1237
>>>       #4 0x4fdecc in process_upcall ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c:1456
>>>       #5 0x4fd936 in upcall_cb ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c:1358
>>>       [...]
>>>   lib/stp.c:754:15: runtime error: member access within misaligned address 
>>> 0x000002c4ea61 for type 'const   struct stp_bpdu_header', which requires 2 
>>> byte alignment
>>>   0x000002c4ea61: note: pointer points here
>>>    26 42 42  03 00 00 00 00 00 80 00  aa 66 aa 66 00 01 00 00  00 00 80 00 
>>> aa 66 aa 66  00 01 80 02 00
>>>                 ^
>>>       #0 0x8a2bce in stp_received_bpdu lib/stp.c:754
>>>       #1 0x51e603 in stp_process_packet ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:1788
>>>       #2 0x52a96d in process_special ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:3394
>>>       #3 0x5534df in xlate_actions ofproto/ofproto-dpif-xlate.c:7766
>>>       #4 0x4fcb49 in upcall_xlate ofproto/ofproto-dpif-upcall.c:1237
>>>       [...]
>>>   lib/lldp/lldp.c:149:10: runtime error: load of misaligned address 
>>> 0x7ffcc0ae72bd for type 'ovs_be16', which requires 2 byte alignment
>>>   0x7ffcc0ae72bd: note: pointer points here
>>>    8e e7 84 ad 04 00 05  46 61 73 74 45 74 68 65  72 6e 65 74 20 31 2f 35  
>>> e0 91 07 c9 3e 7f 00 00  80
>>>                ^
>>>       #0 0x718d63 in lldp_tlv_end lib/lldp/lldp.c:149
>>>       #1 0x7191de in lldp_send lib/lldp/lldp.c:184
>>>       #2 0x484d6c in test_aa_send tests/test-aa.c:238
>>>       [...]
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Dumitru Ceara <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>
>> Acked-by: Aaron Conole <[email protected]>
>>
>> I really doubt that the stp change would impact performance, but it's
>> possible that it could.  Maybe Eelco has a perf script to check it?
> 
> Sorry I have no userspace protocols performance tests/scripts.
> 

I thought this to be "control plane path" and imagined that memcpying 4
bytes will not make a difference.

_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to