On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 8:29 PM Yuan Linsi wrote:
> From: Linsi Yuan
>
> We see a stack smashing as a result of defensive code missing. Once the
> nb_pkts is less than RTE_BNXT_DESCS_PER_LOOP, it will be modified to
> zero after doing a floor align, and we can not exit the following
> receiving p
From: Linsi Yuan
We see a stack smashing as a result of defensive code missing. Once the
nb_pkts is less than RTE_BNXT_DESCS_PER_LOOP, it will be modified to
zero after doing a floor align, and we can not exit the following
receiving packets loop. And the buffers will be overwrite, then the
stack
From: yuanlinsi01
We see a stack smashing as a result of defensive code missing. Once the
nb_pkts is less than RTE_BNXT_DESCS_PER_LOOP, it will be modified to
zero after doing a floor align, and we can not exit the following
receiving packets loop. And the buffers will be overwrite, then the
stac
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 4:55 PM Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 4/30/2020 2:37 PM, Yuan Linsi wrote:
> > From: yuanlinsi01
> >
> > We see a stack smashing as a result of defensive code missing. Once the
> > nb_pkts is less than RTE_BNXT_DESCS_PER_LOOP, it will be modified to
> > zero after doing a floo
On 4/30/2020 2:37 PM, Yuan Linsi wrote:
> From: yuanlinsi01
>
> We see a stack smashing as a result of defensive code missing. Once the
> nb_pkts is less than RTE_BNXT_DESCS_PER_LOOP, it will be modified to
> zero after doing a floor align, and we can not exit the following
> receiving packets lo
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 6:45 AM Lance Richardson <
lance.richard...@broadcom.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 9:37 AM Yuan Linsi wrote:
> >
> > From: yuanlinsi01
> >
> > We see a stack smashing as a result of defensive code missing. Once the
> > nb_pkts is less than RTE_BNXT_DESCS_PER_LOOP,
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 9:37 AM Yuan Linsi wrote:
>
> From: yuanlinsi01
>
> We see a stack smashing as a result of defensive code missing. Once the
> nb_pkts is less than RTE_BNXT_DESCS_PER_LOOP, it will be modified to
> zero after doing a floor align, and we can not exit the following
> receivin
From: yuanlinsi01
We see a stack smashing as a result of defensive code missing. Once the
nb_pkts is less than RTE_BNXT_DESCS_PER_LOOP, it will be modified to
zero after doing a floor align, and we can not exit the following
receiving packets loop. And the buffers will be overwrite, then the
stac
+Lance Richardson
Thanks for the patch, could you please add the 'Fixes' tag as well ?
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 5:35 PM yuanlinsi01 wrote:
>
> We see a stack smashing as a result of defensive code missing. Once the
> nb_pkts is less than RTE_BNXT_DESCS_PER_LOOP, it will be modified to
> zero af
We see a stack smashing as a result of defensive code missing. Once the
nb_pkts is less than RTE_BNXT_DESCS_PER_LOOP, it will be modified to
zero after doing a floor align, and we can not exit the following
receiving packets loop. And the buffers will be overwrite, then the
stack frame was ruined.
We see a stack smashing as a result of defensive code missing. Once the
nb_pkts is less than RTE_BNXT_DESCS_PER_LOOP, it will be modified to
zero after doing a floor align, and we can not exit the following
receiving packets loop. And the buffers will be overwrite, then the
stack frame was ruined.
We see a stack smashing as a result of defensive code missing. Once the
nb_pkts is less than RTE_BNXT_DESCS_PER_LOOP, it will be modified to
zero after doing a floor align, and we can not exit the following
receiving packets loop. And the buffers will be overwrite, then the
stack frame was ruined.
12 matches
Mail list logo