Hi Ciara,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Power, Ciara <ciara.po...@intel.com>
> Sent: Friday, February 18, 2022 12:58 PM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Zhang, Roy Fan <roy.fan.zh...@intel.com>; gak...@marvell.com; Kusztal,
> ArkadiuszX <arkadiuszx.kusz...@intel.com>; Power, Ciara
> <ciara.po...@intel.com>
> Subject: [PATCH] crypto: fix asymmetric private session variable size
>
> When creating the asymmetric session mempool, the maximum private
> session size of all devices is used when creating the mempool
> object size.
> The return value for ``rte_cryptodev_asym_get_private_session_size``
> is unsigned int, whereas the variable was uint8_t, leading to a
> possible overflow issue.
>
> To fix this, the variable for private session size is now changed to
> unsigned int to match the function return type.
>
> Fixes: 1f1e4b7cbaad ("cryptodev: use single mempool for asymmetric
> session")
> Reported-by: Arek Kusztal <arkadiuszx.kusz...@intel.com>
>
> Signed-off-by: Ciara Power <ciara.po...@intel.com>
> ---
> lib/cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c b/lib/cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c
> index 727d271fb9..d262ae6ffa 100644
> --- a/lib/cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c
> +++ b/lib/cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c
> @@ -1810,7 +1810,8 @@ rte_cryptodev_asym_session_pool_create(const
> char *name, uint32_t nb_elts,
> struct rte_mempool *mp;
> struct rte_cryptodev_asym_session_pool_private_data *pool_priv;
> uint32_t obj_sz, obj_sz_aligned;
> - uint8_t dev_id, priv_sz, max_priv_sz = 0;
> + uint8_t dev_id;
> + unsigned int priv_sz, max_priv_sz = 0;
I guess it is better to use uint32_t instead of unsigned int? I know they are
most likely the same thing but probably better to use consistent type.
>
> for (dev_id = 0; dev_id < RTE_CRYPTO_MAX_DEVS; dev_id++)
> if (rte_cryptodev_is_valid_dev(dev_id)) {
> --
> 2.25.1
Regards,
Fan
