From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: fix useless call
Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 18:06:08 +0100
Message-ID: <57321500.6030906@intel.com>
References: <1462875064-119474-1-git-send-email-danielx.t.mrzyglod@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
To: Daniel Mrzyglod <danielx.t.mrzyglod@intel.com>,
 cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A70949AB7
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 10 May 2016 19:06:42 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <1462875064-119474-1-git-send-email-danielx.t.mrzyglod@intel.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On 5/10/2016 11:11 AM, Daniel Mrzyglod wrote:
> Fix issue reported by Coverity.
> Coverity ID 13338
>=20
> A function call that seems to have an intended effect has no actual eff=
ect
> on the logic of the program.
>=20
> In rte_sched_port_free: A function is called that is only useful for it=
s
> return value, and this value is ignored.
>=20
> Fixes: de3cfa2c9823 ("sched: initial import")
>=20
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Mrzyglod <danielx.t.mrzyglod@intel.com>
> ---
>  lib/librte_sched/rte_sched.c | 1 -
>  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>=20
> diff --git a/lib/librte_sched/rte_sched.c b/lib/librte_sched/rte_sched.=
c
> index 1609ea8..9b962a6 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_sched/rte_sched.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_sched/rte_sched.c
> @@ -749,7 +749,6 @@ rte_sched_port_free(struct rte_sched_port *port)
>  			rte_pktmbuf_free(mbufs[i]);
>  	}
> =20
> -	rte_bitmap_free(port->bmp);
>  	rte_free(port);
>  }
> =20
>=20

rte_bitmap_free() just does NULL check on port->bmp.

I thought intention can be to free the "bmp", but this isn't the case:
port->bmp is actually port->bmp_array,
port->bmp_array points somewhere within port->memory,
port->memory (zero sized array) allocated and freed with "port" pointer.

So for this patch:
Acked-by: "Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>"


But as follow up:
rte_bitmap_free() seems only used here, and it does nothing more than
NULL check, with a misleading name, should we remove this function?


Regards,
ferruh