On 1/18/2021 8:59 AM, Zhang,Alvin wrote:
From: Alvin Zhang <alvinx.zh...@intel.com>
Since the patch '1848b117' has set the value of key in 'struct
rte_flow_action_rss' to NULL, the PMD cannot get the RSS key now.
This patch sets offset and size of the key pointer as the first
parameter of the token 'key' and copies the start address of the
'HEX' data to the location specified by the first parameter of
the token.
Can you please put the rte_flow command that enables reproducing this defect, it
may help in the future?
Fixes: 1848b117cca1 ("app/testpmd: fix RSS key for flow API RSS rule")
Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
Signed-off-by: Alvin Zhang <alvinx.zh...@intel.com>
---
app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c | 24 +++++++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c b/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c
index 585cab9..6eb46d3 100644
--- a/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c
+++ b/app/test-pmd/cmdline_flow.c
@@ -3403,7 +3403,10 @@ static int comp_set_sample_index(struct context *, const
struct token *,
.name = "key",
.help = "RSS hash key",
.next = NEXT(action_rss, NEXT_ENTRY(HEX)),
- .args = ARGS(ARGS_ENTRY_ARB(0, 0),
+ .args = ARGS(ARGS_ENTRY_ARB
+ (offsetof(struct action_rss_data, conf) +
+ offsetof(struct rte_flow_action_rss, key),
+ sizeof(((struct rte_flow_action_rss *)0)->key)),
+1, it is required to write the address, and I confirm this enables getting
'key' value to the PMD.
ARGS_ENTRY_ARB
(offsetof(struct action_rss_data, conf) +
offsetof(struct rte_flow_action_rss, key_len),
@@ -6495,19 +6498,18 @@ static int comp_set_sample_index(struct context *,
const struct token *,
if (ctx->objmask)
memset((uint8_t *)ctx->objmask + arg_data->offset,
0xff, hexlen);
+
/* Save address if requested. */
if (arg_addr->size) {
- memcpy((uint8_t *)ctx->object + arg_addr->offset,
- (void *[]){
- (uint8_t *)ctx->object + arg_data->offset
- },
- arg_addr->size);
+ if (arg_addr->size < sizeof(void *))
+ goto error;
Above two lines seems only actual change in this function, others are
refactoring the assignment.
1) why this check required, I think we can ignore it.
2) What do you think to remove the refactoring to reduce the change to the
actual fix?
+
+ *(void **)((uint8_t *)ctx->object + arg_addr->offset) =
+ (uint8_t *)ctx->object + arg_data->offset;
+
if (ctx->objmask)
- memcpy((uint8_t *)ctx->objmask + arg_addr->offset,
- (void *[]){
- (uint8_t *)ctx->objmask + arg_data->offset
- },
- arg_addr->size);
+ *(void **)((uint8_t *)ctx->objmask + arg_addr->offset) =
+ (uint8_t *)ctx->objmask + arg_data->offset;
}
return len;
error:
