All of the pool_get(mypool, new_elt) variants are capable of expanding - and hence moving - mypool, leading to dangling references to free memory if you’re not careful. Here’s the usual coding pattern:
old_elt = pool_elt_at_index (mypool, index); /* use old-elt */ pool_get (mypool, new_elt); /* old-elt now INVALID, but index (or p[0]) is still fine */ old_elt = pool_elt_at_index (mypool, index); <do whatever, old_elt and new_elt are both good-to-go > Thanks… Dave From: vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io [mailto:vpp-dev-boun...@lists.fd.io] On Behalf Of ??? Sent: Thursday, January 4, 2018 1:22 AM To: vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> Subject: [vpp-dev] 'pool_elt_at_index' Relative Addressing Cause a Mistake Hi guys, I'm testing ikev2. When I initiate a sa succeed(pr1), then add the other one (pr2), the sa->pr1->name is rewritten. After viewing I find the 'pool_elt_at_index' is relative addressing . And the 'pool_base' may change when use the pointer we preserved before. eg:'pool_elt_at_index (km->profiles, p[0]);' How can we solve the problem? Thanks, Xyxue ________________________________
_______________________________________________ vpp-dev mailing list vpp-dev@lists.fd.io https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev
