2016-06-16 16:52, Slawomir Mrozowicz:
> Overrunning array mcfg->memseg of 256 44-byte elements
> at element index 257 using index j.
> Fixed by add condition with message information.
>
> Fixes: af75078fece3 ("first public release")
> Coverity ID 13282
Please use this formatting:
Coverity issue: 13282
> Signed-off-by: Slawomir Mrozowicz <slawomirx.mrozowicz at intel.com>
> ---
> v5:
> - update message
> v4:
> - remove check condition from loop
> v3:
> - add check condition inside and outside the loop
> v2:
> - add message information
The changelog is OK.
Please use --in-reply-to when making a new revision to keep them
in the same thread.
> --- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_memory.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_memory.c
> @@ -1301,6 +1301,14 @@ rte_eal_hugepage_init(void)
> break;
> }
>
No newline needed here. The check is directly related to the
previous loop.
> + if (j >= RTE_MAX_MEMSEG) {
It is out of the scope of this patch but I REALLY HATE this variable j.
Considering a more meaningful rename would be a nice patch.
> + RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL,
> + "All memory segments exhausted by IVSHMEM. "
There is no evidence that it is related to IVSHMEM.
"Not enough memory segments." would be more appropriate.
> + "Try recompiling with larger RTE_MAX_MEMSEG "
> + "then current %d\n", RTE_MAX_MEMSEG);
then -> than
