On 4/10/2019 11:55 AM, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
> On 10-Apr-19 8:52 AM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>> On 4/9/2019 3:40 PM, Hunt, David wrote:
>>>
>>> On 9/4/2019 12:18 PM, Burakov, Anatoly wrote:
>>>> On 09-Apr-19 10:22 AM, David Hunt wrote:
>>>>> A previous change removed the limit of 64 cores by
>>>>> moving away from 64-bit masks to char arrays. However
>>>>> this left a buffer overrun issue, where the max channels
>>>>> was defined as 64, and max cores was defined as 256. These
>>>>> should all be consistently set to RTE_MAX_LCORE.
>>>>>
>>>>> The #defines being removed are CHANNEL_CMDS_MAX_CPUS,
>>>>> CHANNEL_CMDS_MAX_CHANNELS, POWER_MGR_MAX_CPUS, and
>>>>> CHANNEL_CMDS_MAX_VM_CHANNELS, and are being replaced
>>>>> with RTE_MAX_LCORE for consistency and simplicity.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixes: fd73630e95c1 ("examples/power: change 64-bit masks to arrays")
>>>>> Coverity issue: 337672
>>>>> Fixes: fd73630e95c1 ("examples/power: change 64-bit masks to arrays")
>>>>> Coverity issue: 337673
>>>>> Fixes: fd73630e95c1 ("examples/power: change 64-bit masks to arrays")
>>>>> Coverity issue: 337678
>>>>
>>>> No need to mention the same commit three times :)
>>>>
>>>
>>> The coverity output said to add this, so I was leaving nothing to
>>> chance... :)
>>
>> Can use comma separated list for multiple issues fixed, like:
>>
>> Coverity issue: 277209, 277215, 277225
>> Fixes: c7e9729da6b5 ("net/nfp: support CPP")
>> Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
>>
>
> It makes it harder to grep for coverity issues, so -1 on the CSV.
>
If you are searching for the issue id, it will be same. I don't have strong
opinion, but both looks same to me, and this is more brief.
