From patchwork Tue Nov 3 02:17:40 2015 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: =?UTF-8?B?6YKj5aicKOaBkuaciCk=?= X-Patchwork-Id: 8562 Return-Path: X-Original-To: patchwork@dpdk.org Delivered-To: patchwork@dpdk.org Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABD5E8E9A; Tue, 3 Nov 2015 03:17:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE0938E98 for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2015 03:17:50 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 02 Nov 2015 18:17:49 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,236,1444719600"; d="scan'208";a="677081578" Received: from shvmail01.sh.intel.com ([10.239.29.42]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 02 Nov 2015 18:17:48 -0800 Received: from shecgisg004.sh.intel.com (shecgisg004.sh.intel.com [10.239.29.89]) by shvmail01.sh.intel.com with ESMTP id tA32HlmU006533; Tue, 3 Nov 2015 10:17:47 +0800 Received: from shecgisg004.sh.intel.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by shecgisg004.sh.intel.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id tA32HiJi019303; Tue, 3 Nov 2015 10:17:46 +0800 Received: (from jijiangl@localhost) by shecgisg004.sh.intel.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id tA32HioY019299; Tue, 3 Nov 2015 10:17:44 +0800 From: Na Na To: dev@dpdk.org Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 10:17:40 +0800 Message-Id: <1446517061-19261-2-git-send-email-nana.nn@alibaba-inc.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.7.12.2 In-Reply-To: <1446517061-19261-1-git-send-email-nana.nn@alibaba-inc.com> References: <1446517061-19261-1-git-send-email-nana.nn@alibaba-inc.com> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/2] lib/lpm:fix an issue of condition check in delete_depth_small() X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Fixes an issue of check logic in delete_depth_small function. For a tbl24 entry, the 'ext_entry' field indicates whether we need to use tbl8_gindex to read the next_hop from a tbl8 entry, or whether it can be read directly from this entry. If a route is deleted, the prefix of previous route is used to override the deleted route. When checking the depth of the previous route the conditional checks both the ext_entry and the depth, but the "else" leg fails to take account that the condition could fail for one of two possible reasons, leading to an incorrect flow when 'ext_entry == 0' is true , but 'lpm->tbl24[i].depth > depth' is false. The fix here is to add a condition check to the else leg so that it only executes when ext_entry is set. Signed-off-by: Na Na --- lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c | 6 ++---- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c index 163ba3c..57ec2f0 100644 --- a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c +++ b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c @@ -734,8 +734,7 @@ delete_depth_small(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked, if (lpm->tbl24[i].ext_entry == 0 && lpm->tbl24[i].depth <= depth ) { lpm->tbl24[i].valid = INVALID; - } - else { + } else if (lpm->tbl24[i].ext_entry == 1) { /* * If TBL24 entry is extended, then there has * to be a rule with depth >= 25 in the @@ -780,8 +779,7 @@ delete_depth_small(struct rte_lpm *lpm, uint32_t ip_masked, if (lpm->tbl24[i].ext_entry == 0 && lpm->tbl24[i].depth <= depth ) { lpm->tbl24[i] = new_tbl24_entry; - } - else { + } else if (lpm->tbl24[i].ext_entry == 1) { /* * If TBL24 entry is extended, then there has * to be a rule with depth >= 25 in the