On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 04:25:15PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 18/05/2018 19:06, Ferruh Yigit:
> > On 5/16/2018 4:41 PM, Adrien Mazarguil wrote:
> > > Like original commit mentioned below, this fix synchronizes flow rule copy
> > > function with testpmd's own implementation following "app/testpmd: fix
> > > copy
> > > of raw flow item (revisited)".
> > >
> > > Fixes: d0ad8648b1c5 ("ethdev: fix shallow copy of flow API RSS action")
> > > Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
> > > Cc: Qi Zhang <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarg...@6wind.com>
> >
> > Hi Thomas,
> >
> > What do you suggest about this one?
> > Scope is limited to rte_flow but still many features are now relies on
> > rte_flow,
> > what is your comment on getting this in rc5?
>
> We need to know exactly what is broken.
> If nothing serious, it can wait 18.08.
>
> Adrien, please can you describe the use case, the issue and the impact?
A prior patch [1] (applied as "app/testpmd: fix copy of raw flow item"),
addresses a crash in testpmd's flow copy function.
The first patch of the present series [2] addresses remaining issues with
its behavior which is, in fact, what caused the original issue.
While both patches focus on testpmd, rte_flow also exposes its own public
copy function with the exact same code that breaks when encountering a RAW
pattern item. Primary users for this function are bonding and failsafe
PMDs.
This patch therefore addresses both [1] and [2] at once for rte_flow_copy().
[1] "app/testpmd: fix invalid memory access"
http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2018-May/100364.html
[2] "app/testpmd: fix copy of raw flow item (revisited)"
http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2018-May/101994.html
--
Adrien Mazarguil
6WIND
