Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6] eal: fix core number validation

[David Marchand]

On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 1:19 PM Bruce Richardson 
wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 12:13:12PM +, Hari Kumar Vemula wrote:
> > When incorrect core value or range provided,
> > as part of -l command line option, a crash occurs.
> >
> > Added valid range checks to fix the crash.
> >
> > Added ut check for negative core values.
> > Added unit test case for invalid core number range.
> >
> > Fixes: d888cb8b9613 ("eal: add core list input format")
> > Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Hari Kumar Vemula 
> > Reviewed-by: David Marchand 
> > --
> > v6: Changed testcase order
> > v5: Corrected unit test case for -l option
> > v4: Used RTE_MAX_LCORE for max core check
> > v3: Added unit test cases for invalid core number range
> > v2: Replace strtoul with strtol
> > Modified log message
> > ---
> >  lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c |  9 +++-
> >  test/test/test_eal_flags.c | 61 ++
> >  2 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> >
> Is this patch related to, or does it fix Bugzilla #19?
>
> https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19


Separate issue, from my pov.
I would say the issue happens with a dpdk process that has no cpu available
wrt CONFIG_RTE_MAX_CORES.
eal_auto_detect_cores() then removes all cores from cfg->lcore_role[], then
eal_adjust_config() an incorrect master lcore is chosen at
cfg->master_lcore = rte_get_next_lcore(-1, 0, 0); ?


-- 
David Marchand

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6] eal: fix core number validation

[Bruce Richardson]

On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 12:13:12PM +, Hari Kumar Vemula wrote:
> When incorrect core value or range provided,
> as part of -l command line option, a crash occurs.
> 
> Added valid range checks to fix the crash.
> 
> Added ut check for negative core values.
> Added unit test case for invalid core number range.
> 
> Fixes: d888cb8b9613 ("eal: add core list input format")
> Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
> 
> Signed-off-by: Hari Kumar Vemula 
> Reviewed-by: David Marchand 
> --
> v6: Changed testcase order
> v5: Corrected unit test case for -l option
> v4: Used RTE_MAX_LCORE for max core check
> v3: Added unit test cases for invalid core number range
> v2: Replace strtoul with strtol
> Modified log message
> ---
>  lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c |  9 +++-
>  test/test/test_eal_flags.c | 61 ++
>  2 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> 
Is this patch related to, or does it fix Bugzilla #19?

https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19

/Bruce

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6] eal: fix core number validation

[Hari Kumar Vemula]

When incorrect core value or range provided,
as part of -l command line option, a crash occurs.

Added valid range checks to fix the crash.

Added ut check for negative core values.
Added unit test case for invalid core number range.

Fixes: d888cb8b9613 ("eal: add core list input format")
Cc: sta...@dpdk.org

Signed-off-by: Hari Kumar Vemula 
Reviewed-by: David Marchand 
--
v6: Changed testcase order
v5: Corrected unit test case for -l option
v4: Used RTE_MAX_LCORE for max core check
v3: Added unit test cases for invalid core number range
v2: Replace strtoul with strtol
Modified log message
---
 lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c |  9 +++-
 test/test/test_eal_flags.c | 61 ++
 2 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c 
b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
index 6e3a83b98..14f40c62c 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_options.c
@@ -592,7 +592,9 @@ eal_parse_corelist(const char *corelist)
if (*corelist == '\0')
return -1;
errno = 0;
-   idx = strtoul(corelist, &end, 10);
+   idx = strtol(corelist, &end, 10);
+   if (idx < 0 || idx >= (int)cfg->lcore_count)
+   return -1;
if (errno || end == NULL)
return -1;
while (isblank(*end))
@@ -1103,6 +1105,7 @@ eal_parse_common_option(int opt, const char *optarg,
 {
static int b_used;
static int w_used;
+   struct rte_config *cfg = rte_eal_get_configuration();
 
switch (opt) {
/* blacklist */
@@ -1145,7 +1148,9 @@ eal_parse_common_option(int opt, const char *optarg,
/* corelist */
case 'l':
if (eal_parse_corelist(optarg) < 0) {
-   RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, "invalid core list\n");
+   RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL,
+   "invalid core list, please check core numbers 
are in [0, %u] range\n",
+   cfg->lcore_count-1);
return -1;
}
 
diff --git a/test/test/test_eal_flags.c b/test/test/test_eal_flags.c
index 2acab9d69..e3a60c7ae 100644
--- a/test/test/test_eal_flags.c
+++ b/test/test/test_eal_flags.c
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
 #include 
 #include 
 
+#include 
 #include 
 #include 
 
@@ -477,40 +478,50 @@ test_missing_c_flag(void)
"-n", "3", "-l", "1," };
const char *argv10[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
 "-n", "3", "-l", "1#2" };
+   /* core number is negative value */
+   const char * const argv11[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
+   "-n", "3", "-l", "-5" };
+   const char * const argv12[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
+   "-n", "3", "-l", "-5-7" };
+   /* core number is maximum value */
+   const char * const argv13[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
+   "-n", "3", "-l", RTE_STR(RTE_MAX_LCORE) };
+   const char * const argv14[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
+   "-n", "3", "-l", "1-"RTE_STR(RTE_MAX_LCORE) };
/* sanity check test - valid corelist value */
-   const char *argv11[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
+   const char * const argv15[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
 "-n", "3", "-l", "1-2,3" };
 
/* --lcores flag but no lcores value */
-   const char *argv12[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
+   const char * const argv16[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
 "-n", "3", "--lcores" };
-   const char *argv13[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
+   const char * const argv17[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
 "-n", "3", "--lcores", " " };
/* bad lcores value */
-   const char *argv14[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
+   const char * const argv18[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
 "-n", "3", "--lcores", "1-3-5" };
-   const char *argv15[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
+   const char * const argv19[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
 "-n", "3", "--lcores", "0-1,,2" };
-   const char *argv16[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
+   const char * const argv20[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
 "-n", "3", "--lcores", "0-,1" };
-   const char *argv17[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
+   const char * const argv21[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
 "-n", "3", "--lcores", "(0-,2-4)" };
-   const char *argv18[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
+   const char * const argv22[] = { prgname, prefix, mp_flag,
 "-n", "3", "--lcores", "(-1,2)" };
-   const cha