在 2021/4/29 21:33, Ferruh Yigit 写道:
On 4/27/2021 2:40 AM, Min Hu (Connor) wrote:
Buffer 'test_params->slave_port_ids' of size 6 accessed may
overflow, since its index 'i' can have value be is out of range.
This patch fixed it.
Fixes: 92073ef961ee ("bond: unit tests")
Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
Signed-off-by: Min Hu (Connor) <humi...@huawei.com>
---
v2:
* fix bonded_slave_count value.
---
app/test/test_link_bonding.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/app/test/test_link_bonding.c b/app/test/test_link_bonding.c
index 8a5c831..f8abb22 100644
--- a/app/test/test_link_bonding.c
+++ b/app/test/test_link_bonding.c
@@ -2216,6 +2216,9 @@ test_activebackup_rx_burst(void)
"failed to get primary slave for bonded port (%d)",
test_params->bonded_port_id);
+ if (test_params->bonded_slave_count > TEST_MAX_NUMBER_OF_PORTS)
+ test_params->bonded_slave_count = TEST_MAX_NUMBER_OF_PORTS;
+
Hi Connor,
Similar comment as previous version, what is the root cause, how
'bonded_slave_count' end up being bigger than 'TEST_MAX_NUMBER_OF_PORTS'?
Hi Ferruh,
Currently, it will not happen.
But if the testcase extended, for instance,
"test_add_slave_to_bonded_device" is called over
TEST_MAX_NUMBER_OF_PORTS(6) times in
"test_add_already_bonded_slave_to_bonded_device",
then 'bonded_slave_count' will be bigger than
'TEST_MAX_NUMBER_OF_PORTS'.
for (i = 0; i < test_params->bonded_slave_count; i++) {
/* Generate test bursts of packets to transmit */
TEST_ASSERT_EQUAL(generate_test_burst(
.