From: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
To: Laurent Vivier <lvivier@redhat.com>
Cc: passt-dev@passt.top
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] packet: replace struct desc by struct iovec
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 12:48:27 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Znjee-Qq8vtM3oCI@zatzit> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240621145640.1914287-2-lvivier@redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6167 bytes --]
On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 04:56:36PM +0200, Laurent Vivier wrote:
Needs a commit message.
> Signed-off-by: Laurent Vivier <lvivier@redhat.com>
> ---
> packet.c | 75 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
> packet.h | 14 ++---------
> 2 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/packet.c b/packet.c
> index ccfc84607709..af2a539a1794 100644
> --- a/packet.c
> +++ b/packet.c
> @@ -22,6 +22,36 @@
> #include "util.h"
> #include "log.h"
>
Function comment, please.
> +static int packet_check_range(const struct pool *p, size_t offset, size_t len,
> + const char *start, const char *func, int line)
> +{
> + if (start < p->buf) {
> + if (func) {
> + trace("add packet start %p before buffer start %p, "
> + "%s:%i", (void *)start, (void *)p->buf, func, line);
> + }
> + return -1;
Pre-existing, but I wonder if these should be assert()s. Are there
any cases where we'd hit this path that don't indicate a bug in the
caller?
> + }
> +
> + if (start + len + offset > p->buf + p->buf_size) {
Also pre-existing, but I wonder if we should check for overflow of
(Start + len + offset).
> + if (func) {
> + trace("packet offset plus length %lu from size %lu, "
> + "%s:%i", start - p->buf + len + offset,
> + p->buf_size, func, line);
> + }
> + return -1;
> + }
> +
> +#if UINTPTR_MAX == UINT64_MAX
> + if ((uintptr_t)start - (uintptr_t)p->buf > UINT32_MAX) {
I don't think this check is relevant any more if we're going to iovecs
- this was just because the offset in struct desc was only 32-bit.
> + trace("add packet start %p, buffer start %p, %s:%i",
> + (void *)start, (void *)p->buf, func, line);
> + return -1;
> + }
> +#endif
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> /**
> * packet_add_do() - Add data as packet descriptor to given pool
> * @p: Existing pool
> @@ -41,34 +71,16 @@ void packet_add_do(struct pool *p, size_t len, const char *start,
> return;
> }
>
> - if (start < p->buf) {
> - trace("add packet start %p before buffer start %p, %s:%i",
> - (void *)start, (void *)p->buf, func, line);
> + if (packet_check_range(p, 0, len, start, func, line))
> return;
> - }
> -
> - if (start + len > p->buf + p->buf_size) {
> - trace("add packet start %p, length: %zu, buffer end %p, %s:%i",
> - (void *)start, len, (void *)(p->buf + p->buf_size),
> - func, line);
> - return;
> - }
>
> if (len > UINT16_MAX) {
> trace("add packet length %zu, %s:%i", len, func, line);
> return;
> }
>
> -#if UINTPTR_MAX == UINT64_MAX
> - if ((uintptr_t)start - (uintptr_t)p->buf > UINT32_MAX) {
> - trace("add packet start %p, buffer start %p, %s:%i",
> - (void *)start, (void *)p->buf, func, line);
> - return;
> - }
> -#endif
> -
> - p->pkt[idx].offset = start - p->buf;
> - p->pkt[idx].len = len;
> + p->pkt[idx].iov_base = (void *)start;
> + p->pkt[idx].iov_len = len;
>
> p->count++;
> }
> @@ -104,28 +116,23 @@ void *packet_get_do(const struct pool *p, size_t idx, size_t offset,
> return NULL;
> }
>
> - if (p->pkt[idx].offset + len + offset > p->buf_size) {
> + if (len + offset > p->pkt[idx].iov_len) {
> if (func) {
> - trace("packet offset plus length %zu from size %zu, "
> - "%s:%i", p->pkt[idx].offset + len + offset,
> - p->buf_size, func, line);
> + trace("data length %zu, offset %zu from length %zu, "
> + "%s:%i", len, offset, p->pkt[idx].iov_len,
> + func, line);
I'm not sure either the old or new message is particularly descriptive
here :/
> }
> return NULL;
> }
>
> - if (len + offset > p->pkt[idx].len) {
> - if (func) {
> - trace("data length %zu, offset %zu from length %u, "
> - "%s:%i", len, offset, p->pkt[idx].len,
> - func, line);
> - }
> + if (packet_check_range(p, offset, len, p->pkt[idx].iov_base,
> + func, line))
Ah.. right.. in this case we certainly don't want ASSERT()s in
packet_check_range(). Still wonder if that would make more sense for
the packet add case, however.
A couple of other points:
* You've effectively switched the order of the two different tests here
(one range checking against the entire buffer, one range checking
against a single packet). Any reason for that?
* Do we actually need the entire-buffer check here on the _get()
side? Isn't it enough to ensure that packets lie within the buffer
when they're inserted? Pre-existing, again, AFAICT.
> return NULL;
> - }
>
> if (left)
> - *left = p->pkt[idx].len - offset - len;
> + *left = p->pkt[idx].iov_len - offset - len;
>
> - return p->buf + p->pkt[idx].offset + offset;
> + return (char *)p->pkt[idx].iov_base + offset;
> }
>
> /**
> diff --git a/packet.h b/packet.h
> index a784b07bbed5..8377dcf678bb 100644
> --- a/packet.h
> +++ b/packet.h
> @@ -6,16 +6,6 @@
> #ifndef PACKET_H
> #define PACKET_H
>
> -/**
> - * struct desc - Generic offset-based descriptor within buffer
> - * @offset: Offset of descriptor relative to buffer start, 32-bit limit
> - * @len: Length of descriptor, host order, 16-bit limit
> - */
> -struct desc {
> - uint32_t offset;
> - uint16_t len;
> -};
> -
> /**
> * struct pool - Generic pool of packets stored in a buffer
> * @buf: Buffer storing packet descriptors
> @@ -29,7 +19,7 @@ struct pool {
> size_t buf_size;
> size_t size;
> size_t count;
> - struct desc pkt[1];
> + struct iovec pkt[1];
> };
>
> void packet_add_do(struct pool *p, size_t len, const char *start,
> @@ -54,7 +44,7 @@ struct _name ## _t { \
> size_t buf_size; \
> size_t size; \
> size_t count; \
> - struct desc pkt[_size]; \
> + struct iovec pkt[_size]; \
> }
>
> #define PACKET_POOL_INIT_NOCAST(_size, _buf, _buf_size) \
--
David Gibson (he or they) | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you, not the other way
| around.
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-24 3:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-21 14:56 [PATCH 0/5] Add vhost-user support to passt. (part 3) Laurent Vivier
2024-06-21 14:56 ` [PATCH 1/5] packet: replace struct desc by struct iovec Laurent Vivier
2024-06-24 2:48 ` David Gibson [this message]
2024-07-04 15:52 ` Laurent Vivier
2024-07-05 1:28 ` David Gibson
2024-06-21 14:56 ` [PATCH 2/5] vhost-user: introduce virtio API Laurent Vivier
2024-06-24 2:56 ` David Gibson
2024-07-05 15:06 ` Laurent Vivier
2024-07-05 23:53 ` David Gibson
2024-06-21 14:56 ` [PATCH 3/5] vhost-user: introduce vhost-user API Laurent Vivier
2024-06-24 3:02 ` David Gibson
2024-07-11 12:07 ` Laurent Vivier
2024-06-21 14:56 ` [PATCH 4/5] iov: add iov_count() Laurent Vivier
2024-06-24 3:03 ` David Gibson
2024-06-24 6:59 ` Laurent Vivier
2024-06-21 14:56 ` [PATCH 5/5] vhost-user: add vhost-user Laurent Vivier
2024-06-24 5:05 ` David Gibson
2024-07-12 14:49 ` Laurent Vivier
2024-07-15 0:37 ` David Gibson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Znjee-Qq8vtM3oCI@zatzit \
--to=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=lvivier@redhat.com \
--cc=passt-dev@passt.top \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://passt.top/passt
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for IMAP folder(s).