Hi Daniel,

quoted

quoted

--- a/lib/librte_cmdline/cmdline_rdline.c
+++ b/lib/librte_cmdline/cmdline_rdline.c

@@ -377,7 +377,10 @@ rdline_char_in(struct rdline *rdl, char c)
 		case CMDLINE_KEY_CTRL_K:
 			cirbuf_get_buf_head(&rdl->right, rdl->kill_buf,

RDLINE_BUF_SIZE);

quoted

 			rdl->kill_size = CIRBUF_GET_LEN(&rdl->right);
-			cirbuf_del_buf_head(&rdl->right, rdl->kill_size);
+
+			if (cirbuf_del_buf_head(&rdl->right, rdl->kill_size) < 0)
+					return -EINVAL;
+
 			rdline_puts(rdl, vt100_clear_right);
 			break;

I wonder if a better way to fix wouldn't be to remove the checks
introduced in http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk/commit/?id=ab971e562860

There is no reason to check that in cirbuf_get_buf_head/tail():
   if (!cbuf || !c)

The function should never fail, it just returns the number of
copied chars. This is the responsibility of the caller to ensure
that the pointer to the circular buffer is not NULL.

Also, rdline_char_in() is not expected to return -EINVAL, but
RDLINE_RES_* instead.

So I think that partially revert ab971e562860 would fix the
coverity warning.

Regards,
Olivier

Removing checks probably will generate more Coverity errors somewhere.
I see that only places where we test negative values are in unit tests.

Reverting changes I think is overhead and maybe ignoring this patch and set is as false positive in Coverity is better idea ?

We can mark the warning as false positive because this cannot happen
right now (the calller checks the validity of cbuf/c).

But this is probably something I'll come back on with a patch since
there is no reason to check that pointers are not NULL in
cirbuf_get_buf_head/tail().

Regards,
Olivier