From: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
To: "Stephen Hemminger" <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Cc: <dev@dpdk.org>, "Thomas Monjalon" <thomas@monjalon.net>,
"Konstantin Ananyev" <konstantin.ananyev@huawei.com>,
"Andrew Rybchenko" <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>,
"Bruce Richardson" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
"Ali Alnubani" <alialnu@nvidia.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] stack: fix pile GCC memcpy warnings
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2026 17:16:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35F65ACD@smartserver.smartshare.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261020072333.30593486@phoenix.local>
> From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:stephen@networkplumber.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, 20 October 2026 16.24
>
> On Tue, 20 Oct 2026 08:49:44 +0000
> Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
>
> > On architectures where rte_memcpy() is defined as memcpy(),
> > GCC warns about source/destination overflow when copying more than
> the
> > source/destination size, even for code paths that are not taken in
> cases
> > where the sizes are smaller.
> >
> > The relevant compiler warnings were disabled for GCC at the two
> > occurrences, and comments describing the reason were added.
> >
> > NB:
> > It has not been investigated which GCC versions are affected.
> > GCC version 10 and up was chosen because that was what the previous
> > versions of x86 rte_memcpy() disabled sligthly similar warnings for.
> >
> > PS:
> > The alternative was to obfuscate the code, but that would make the
> code
> > less readable, and might have unintended effects on architectures and
> > compilers not suffering by this issue.
> >
> > Bugzilla ID: 2061
> > Fixes: ee0822a0ef41 ("stack: introduce pile")
> >
> > The pile was introduce with this DPDK release, so no need to
> backport.
> >
> > Reported-by: Ali Alnubani <alialnu@nvidia.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
> > ---
>
> I don't like using compiler pragmas for this. It also means that if
> compiler gets fixed or behaves differently you will never see it.
>
>
> AI analysis shows some other options.
>
> Root cause is --buildtype=debug, i.e. -O0, not the GCC version. At -O0
> nothing removes the dead n_bulk > 0 path for rte_stack_push(s, &obj,
> 1), so the constant 256-byte memcpy is checked against obj (8 bytes)
> and warns. Reproduced with GCC 13.3 and 14.2 at -O0; silent at -Og and
> above. That means the GCC_VERSION >= 100000 gate is wrong at both ends:
> any GCC with the warning fires (overflow since 8, overread since 11),
> and on GCC 10 the -Wstringop-overread pragma itself is a -Wpragmas
> error under -Werror. If the pragma stays, drop the version gate (keep
> RTE_TOOLCHAIN_GCC) and fix the comment: GCC does not “know” the path is
> dead, that is the whole problem.
Continuing this line of thinking...
GCC defines an "__OPTIMIZE__" macro if any optimization above level 0 is turned on.
We could gate such pragmas with:
#if defined(RTE_TOOLCHAIN_GCC) && !defined(__OPTIMIZE__)
>
>
> This should have a big ass comment, and it should use same pragma set
> as existing one in lib/ring.
I generally prefer having the pragma coverage as narrow as possible, so they don't prevent catching unrelated bugs in the same file.
On the other hand,
I also like the suggestion in your other email - disabling these false-positive GCC warnings globally across DPDK for non-optimized builds.
And since the default build type is debugoptimized, it will not prevent GCC from emitting relevant warnings during normal development.
>
> Other alternative is to use bulk object array as structure and do
> assignment.
> But that replaces ugly pragmas with ugly casts...
Yeah, let's not do that.
But thank you for exploring!
>
> --- a/lib/stack/rte_stack_pile.h
> +++ b/lib/stack/rte_stack_pile.h
> @@
> +/* Bulk object array as a single object, so a copy is one assignment.
> */
> +struct rte_stack_pile_bulk_objs {
> + void *objs[RTE_STACK_PILE_BULK_SIZE];
> +};
> +
> @@ __rte_stack_pile_bulk_pop_elems
> for (unsigned int i = 0; i < num; i++, tmp = tmp->next)
> - rte_memcpy(&obj_table[i * RTE_STACK_PILE_BULK_SIZE],
> - ((struct rte_stack_pile_bulk_elem *)tmp)-
> >objs,
> - sizeof(void *) *
> RTE_STACK_PILE_BULK_SIZE);
> + *(struct rte_stack_pile_bulk_objs *)&obj_table[i *
> RTE_STACK_PILE_BULK_SIZE] =
> + *(struct rte_stack_pile_bulk_objs *)((struct
> rte_stack_pile_bulk_elem *)tmp)->objs;
> @@ __rte_stack_pile_push
> for (i = 0; i < n_bulk; i++, tmp = tmp->next)
> - rte_memcpy(((struct rte_stack_pile_bulk_elem *)tmp)->objs,
> - &obj_table[(n_bulk - i - 1) *
> RTE_STACK_PILE_BULK_SIZE],
> - sizeof(void *) * RTE_STACK_PILE_BULK_SIZE);
> + *(struct rte_stack_pile_bulk_objs *)((struct
> rte_stack_pile_bulk_elem *)tmp)->objs =
> + *(const struct rte_stack_pile_bulk_objs
> *)&obj_table[(n_bulk - i - 1) * RTE_STACK_PILE_BULK_SIZE];
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-20 15:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-20 8:49 [PATCH] stack: fix pile GCC memcpy warnings Morten Brørup
2026-10-20 9:18 ` Bruce Richardson
2026-10-20 9:59 ` Morten Brørup
2026-10-20 10:18 ` Ali Alnubani
2026-10-20 14:23 ` Stephen Hemminger
2026-10-20 15:16 ` Morten Brørup [this message]
2026-10-20 15:39 ` Morten Brørup
2026-10-20 14:34 ` Stephen Hemminger
2026-10-20 15:27 ` Morten Brørup
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=98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35F65ACD@smartserver.smartshare.dk \
--to=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
--cc=alialnu@nvidia.com \
--cc=andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@huawei.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/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.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox