drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/nfp_net_common.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
The size argument to kcalloc should be the size of desired structure,
not the pointer to it.
Fixes: 6402528b7a0b ("nfp: xsk: add AF_XDP zero-copy Rx and Tx support")
Signed-off-by: Chen Ni <nichen@iscas.ac.cn>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/nfp_net_common.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/nfp_net_common.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/nfp_net_common.c
index 182ba0a8b095..768f22cd3d02 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/nfp_net_common.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/nfp_net_common.c
@@ -2539,7 +2539,7 @@ nfp_net_alloc(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct nfp_dev_info *dev_info,
nn->dp.num_r_vecs, num_online_cpus());
nn->max_r_vecs = nn->dp.num_r_vecs;
- nn->dp.xsk_pools = kcalloc(nn->max_r_vecs, sizeof(nn->dp.xsk_pools),
+ nn->dp.xsk_pools = kcalloc(nn->max_r_vecs, sizeof(*nn->dp.xsk_pools),
GFP_KERNEL);
if (!nn->dp.xsk_pools) {
err = -ENOMEM;
--
2.25.1
On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 10:56:25AM +0800, Chen Ni wrote:
> The size argument to kcalloc should be the size of desired structure,
> not the pointer to it.
>
> Fixes: 6402528b7a0b ("nfp: xsk: add AF_XDP zero-copy Rx and Tx support")
> Signed-off-by: Chen Ni <nichen@iscas.ac.cn>
nit: s/ntp/nfp/ in the subject
...
Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 10:56:25AM +0800, Chen Ni wrote:
> The size argument to kcalloc should be the size of desired structure,
> not the pointer to it.
>
> Fixes: 6402528b7a0b ("nfp: xsk: add AF_XDP zero-copy Rx and Tx support")
> Signed-off-by: Chen Ni <nichen@iscas.ac.cn>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/nfp_net_common.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/nfp_net_common.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/nfp_net_common.c
> index 182ba0a8b095..768f22cd3d02 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/nfp_net_common.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/nfp_net_common.c
> @@ -2539,7 +2539,7 @@ nfp_net_alloc(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct nfp_dev_info *dev_info,
> nn->dp.num_r_vecs, num_online_cpus());
> nn->max_r_vecs = nn->dp.num_r_vecs;
>
> - nn->dp.xsk_pools = kcalloc(nn->max_r_vecs, sizeof(nn->dp.xsk_pools),
> + nn->dp.xsk_pools = kcalloc(nn->max_r_vecs, sizeof(*nn->dp.xsk_pools),
> GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!nn->dp.xsk_pools) {
> err = -ENOMEM;
> --
Looks good to me, thanks.
Signed-off-by: Louis Peens <louis.peens@corigine.com>
On 7/3/24 04:56, Chen Ni wrote:
> The size argument to kcalloc should be the size of desired structure,
xsk_pools is a double pointer, so not "desired structure" but rather you
should talk about an element size.
> not the pointer to it.
>
> Fixes: 6402528b7a0b ("nfp: xsk: add AF_XDP zero-copy Rx and Tx support")
even if the the behavior is not changed, the fix should be targeted to
net tree
> Signed-off-by: Chen Ni <nichen@iscas.ac.cn>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/nfp_net_common.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/nfp_net_common.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/nfp_net_common.c
> index 182ba0a8b095..768f22cd3d02 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/nfp_net_common.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/nfp_net_common.c
> @@ -2539,7 +2539,7 @@ nfp_net_alloc(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct nfp_dev_info *dev_info,
> nn->dp.num_r_vecs, num_online_cpus());
> nn->max_r_vecs = nn->dp.num_r_vecs;
>
> - nn->dp.xsk_pools = kcalloc(nn->max_r_vecs, sizeof(nn->dp.xsk_pools),
> + nn->dp.xsk_pools = kcalloc(nn->max_r_vecs, sizeof(*nn->dp.xsk_pools),
> GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!nn->dp.xsk_pools) {
> err = -ENOMEM;
code change is correct, even if the size is the same
Reviewed-by: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>
On Wed, 2024-07-03 at 11:16 +0200, Przemek Kitszel wrote:
> On 7/3/24 04:56, Chen Ni wrote:
> > The size argument to kcalloc should be the size of desired structure,
>
> xsk_pools is a double pointer, so not "desired structure" but rather you
> should talk about an element size.
>
> > not the pointer to it.
> >
> > Fixes: 6402528b7a0b ("nfp: xsk: add AF_XDP zero-copy Rx and Tx support")
>
> even if the the behavior is not changed, the fix should be targeted to
> net tree
This patch is IMHO more a cleanup than a real fix. As such it's more
suited for net-next. For the same reason I think it should not go to
stable, so I'm dropping the fixes tag, too.
Thanks,
Paolo
On Thu, 2024-07-04 at 11:36 +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On Wed, 2024-07-03 at 11:16 +0200, Przemek Kitszel wrote:
> > On 7/3/24 04:56, Chen Ni wrote:
> > > The size argument to kcalloc should be the size of desired structure,
> >
> > xsk_pools is a double pointer, so not "desired structure" but rather you
> > should talk about an element size.
> >
> > > not the pointer to it.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 6402528b7a0b ("nfp: xsk: add AF_XDP zero-copy Rx and Tx support")
> >
> > even if the the behavior is not changed, the fix should be targeted to
> > net tree
>
> This patch is IMHO more a cleanup than a real fix. As such it's more
> suited for net-next. For the same reason I think it should not go to
> stable, so I'm dropping the fixes tag, too.
Thinking again about it, this patch has a few things to be cleaned-up.
@Chen Ni, please submit a new revision, adjusting the subj and commit
message as per Przemek and Simon feedback and dropping the fixes tag,
still targeting net-next.
You can retain the already collected tags.
Thanks,
Paolo
On 7/4/24 11:41, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-07-04 at 11:36 +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
>> On Wed, 2024-07-03 at 11:16 +0200, Przemek Kitszel wrote:
>>> On 7/3/24 04:56, Chen Ni wrote:
>>>> The size argument to kcalloc should be the size of desired structure,
>>>
>>> xsk_pools is a double pointer, so not "desired structure" but rather you
>>> should talk about an element size.
>>>
>>>> not the pointer to it.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 6402528b7a0b ("nfp: xsk: add AF_XDP zero-copy Rx and Tx support")
>>>
>>> even if the the behavior is not changed, the fix should be targeted to
>>> net tree
>>
>> This patch is IMHO more a cleanup than a real fix. As such it's more
>> suited for net-next. For the same reason I think it should not go to
>> stable, so I'm dropping the fixes tag, too.
I'm fine with targeting it at any of the trees.
But I still believe it is a fix, even if a trivial one, and even if code
"works" - it's a "wrong" code.
Here I received similar feedback in a similar case:
https://www.mail-archive.com/intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org/msg03252.html
and I changed my mind then.
>
> Thinking again about it, this patch has a few things to be cleaned-up.
>
> @Chen Ni, please submit a new revision, adjusting the subj and commit
> message as per Przemek and Simon feedback and dropping the fixes tag,
> still targeting net-next.
>
> You can retain the already collected tags.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Paolo
>
On Thu, 4 Jul 2024 12:17:39 +0200 Przemek Kitszel wrote: > >> This patch is IMHO more a cleanup than a real fix. As such it's more > >> suited for net-next. For the same reason I think it should not go to > >> stable, so I'm dropping the fixes tag, too. > > I'm fine with targeting it at any of the trees. > > But I still believe it is a fix, even if a trivial one, and even if code > "works" - it's a "wrong" code. > > Here I received similar feedback in a similar case: > https://www.mail-archive.com/intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org/msg03252.html > and I changed my mind then. Comments, docs, and the MAINTAINERS file are special. This is actually changing the code, and at present results in the same binary getting generated.
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.