Hi, thanks already Stephen for your ack on this patch. I was realizing that my lpm patches were still not applied which is ok given the amount of patches flowing by, but I wanted to ask again. Considering the discussion between Bruce and Thomas about review and maintainers I realized it might be best to add the respective maitainer as a "to". Sorry I had forgotten that the first time - In the lpm case that is Bruce, so addressing directly.
It is about two patches, I didn't know about the second when submitting the first so they are two individual submissions and not a series. They still apply as of today (slight offset now but still applying). Please let me know if you want them grouped to a series, rebased or anything else before committing. The two patches I talk about: http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/11067/ http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/11065/ Thanks in advance, Christian Christian Ehrhardt Software Engineer, Ubuntu Server Canonical Ltd On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Stephen Hemminger < stephen at networkplumber.org> wrote: > On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 11:31:20 +0100 > Christian Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt at canonical.com> wrote: > > > In certain autotests lpm->max_rules turned out to be non initialized. > > That was caused by a failing allocation for lpm->rules_tbl in > rte_lpm6_create. > > It then left the function via goto exit with lpm freed, but still a > pointer > > value being set. > > > > In case of an allocation failure it resets lpm to NULL now, to avoid the > > upper layers operate on that already freed memory. > > Along that is also makes the RTE_LOG message of the failed allocation > unique. > > --- > > lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm6.c | 3 ++- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm6.c b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm6.c > > index 6c2b293..48931cc 100644 > > --- a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm6.c > > +++ b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm6.c > > @@ -206,8 +206,9 @@ rte_lpm6_create(const char *name, int socket_id, > > (size_t)rules_size, RTE_CACHE_LINE_SIZE, > socket_id); > > > > if (lpm->rules_tbl == NULL) { > > - RTE_LOG(ERR, LPM, "LPM memory allocation failed\n"); > > + RTE_LOG(ERR, LPM, "LPM rules_tbl allocation failed\n"); > > rte_free(lpm); > > + lpm = NULL; > > rte_free(te); > > goto exit; > > } > > Acked-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen at networkplumber.org> >
