On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 10:48:42PM +0800, keivinwang wrote:
> add param check when tx_queue or rx_queqe is null.
>
Hi,
trying to get some context on this patch. Have you encountered a situation
where there are actually NULL parameters getting passed to the functions,
or where an rx queue is unexpectedly NULL? If so, while adding NULL checks
is not a big issue in itself, the values being NULL may indicate a more
serious underlying issue we need to investigate.
> Signed-off-by: keivinwang <keivinw...@126.com>
For a sign-off, the general format is to have both firstname and
second/family name given as separate words.
Thanks,
/Bruce
> ---
> drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c | 11 +++++++----
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
> index f6c17d4efb..245b3527db 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
> @@ -2539,6 +2539,8 @@ static const struct ixgbe_txq_ops def_txq_ops = {
> void __rte_cold
> ixgbe_set_tx_function(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, struct ixgbe_tx_queue *txq)
> {
> + if (txq == NULL)
> + return;
Have you encountered a situation where this function can be given a null
parameter?
> /* Use a simple Tx queue (no offloads, no multi segs) if possible */
> if ((txq->offloads == 0) &&
> #ifdef RTE_LIB_SECURITY
> @@ -4953,12 +4955,13 @@ ixgbe_set_rx_function(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
>
> for (i = 0; i < dev->data->nb_rx_queues; i++) {
> struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq = dev->data->rx_queues[i];
> -
Similarly here, if nb_rx_queues == X, is it possible a queue between
0..X-1 to be NULL?
> - rxq->rx_using_sse = rx_using_sse;
> + if (rxq) {
> + rxq->rx_using_sse = rx_using_sse;
> #ifdef RTE_LIB_SECURITY
> - rxq->using_ipsec = !!(dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode.offloads &
> - RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_SECURITY);
> + rxq->using_ipsec =
> !!(dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode.offloads &
> + RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_SECURITY);
> #endif
> + }
> }
