[dpdk-stable] [PATCH v4] lib/efd: fix to free tail queue entry after use

[De Lara Guarch, Pablo]

Hi,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vemula, Hari KumarX
> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2019 1:37 PM
> To: dev at dpdk.org
> Cc: Marohn, Byron <byron.marohn at intel.com>; Pattan, Reshma
> <reshma.pattan at intel.com>; De Lara Guarch, Pablo
> <pablo.de.lara.guarch at intel.com>; Parthasarathy, JananeeX M
> <jananeex.m.parthasarathy at intel.com>; Vemula, Hari KumarX
> <hari.kumarx.vemula at intel.com>; stable at dpdk.org
> Subject: [PATCH v4] lib/efd: fix to free tail queue entry after use
> 
> In rte_efd_create() allocated memory for tail queue entry but not freed.
> Added freeing the tail queue entry.
> 
> Fixes: 56b6ef874f80 ("efd: new Elastic Flow Distributor library")
> Cc: stable at dpdk.org
> 
> Signed-off-by: Hari Kumar Vemula <hari.kumarx.vemula at intel.com>
> Acked-by: Reshma Pattan <reshma.pattan at intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.nagarahalli at arm.com>
> ---
> v4: RTE_TAILQ_CAST moved after for loop
> v3: Replaced TAILQ_FOREACH_SAFE with TAILQ_FOREACH
> v2: Updated commit message.
> ---
>  lib/librte_efd/rte_efd.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/librte_efd/rte_efd.c b/lib/librte_efd/rte_efd.c index
> e6e5cfda2..b19e707d8 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_efd/rte_efd.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_efd/rte_efd.c
> @@ -740,6 +740,8 @@ void
>  rte_efd_free(struct rte_efd_table *table)  {
>  	uint8_t socket_id;
> +	struct rte_efd_list *efd_list;
> +	struct rte_tailq_entry *te, *temp;
> 
>  	if (table == NULL)
>  		return;
> @@ -747,6 +749,18 @@ rte_efd_free(struct rte_efd_table *table)
>  	for (socket_id = 0; socket_id < RTE_MAX_NUMA_NODES; socket_id++)
>  		rte_free(table->chunks[socket_id]);
> 
> +	efd_list = RTE_TAILQ_CAST(rte_efd_tailq.head, rte_efd_list);
> +	rte_rwlock_write_lock(RTE_EAL_TAILQ_RWLOCK);
> +
> +	TAILQ_FOREACH_SAFE(te, efd_list, next, temp) {
> +		if (te->data == (void *) table) {
> +			TAILQ_REMOVE(efd_list, te, next);
> +			rte_free(te);
> +			te = NULL;

No need to set te = NULL, as it is a local variable.
Also, you can break here, as no duplicates are allowed.

Apart from this two changes:

Acked-by: Pablo de Lara <pablo.de.lara.guarch at intel.com>