On 01.08.2018 21:16, De Lara Guarch, Pablo wrote:
Hi Andrew,
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Rybchenko [mailto:arybche...@solarflare.com]
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2018 4:49 PM
To: De Lara Guarch, Pablo <pablo.de.lara.gua...@intel.com>;
olivier.m...@6wind.com
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mempool: check for invalid args on creation
On 17.07.2018 13:37, Pablo de Lara wrote:
Currently, a mempool can be created if the number of objects is zero
or the size of these is zero.
In these scenarios, rte_mempool_create should return NULL, as the
mempool created is useless.
Signed-off-by: Pablo de Lara <pablo.de.lara.gua...@intel.com>
---
lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c | 12 ++++++++++++
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
diff --git a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c
b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c
index 8c8b9f809..8c9573f1a 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c
+++ b/lib/librte_mempool/rte_mempool.c
@@ -916,6 +916,18 @@ rte_mempool_create_empty(const char *name,
unsigned n, unsigned elt_size,
mempool_list = RTE_TAILQ_CAST(rte_mempool_tailq.head,
rte_mempool_list);
+ /* asked for zero items */
+ if (n == 0) {
+ rte_errno = EINVAL;
+ return NULL;
+ }
I agree which the check since attempt to populate it will most likely fail with
-
ENOSPC.
+
+ /* asked for zero-sized elements */
+ if (elt_size == 0) {
+ rte_errno = EINVAL;
+ return NULL;
+ }
+
I'm not sure about this one. I could imagine the case when mempool elements
are used just as unique markers. So, I'm not sure that we should restrict such
usage.
I can drop this one and send a v2 on the first check. Is that OK?
Yes. Thanks.
Andrew.
