Fix unchecked CUDA API calls in utility functions #2517
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
16512016, 16512037, 16512220, 16512041 Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Lecki <klecki@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Lecki <klecki@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Lecki <klecki@nvidia.com>
klecki
force-pushed
the
coverity-medium-more
branch
from
5f7a74b
to
738e69d
Compare
|
!build |
|
CI MESSAGE: [1864225]: BUILD STARTED |
|
CI MESSAGE: [1864225]: BUILD FAILED |
mzient
reviewed
Dec 4, 2020
dali/operators/audio/mfcc/mfcc.cu
Outdated
| @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ bool MFCC<GPUBackend>::SetupImpl(std::vector<OutputDesc> &output_desc, | |||
| output_desc = detail::SetupKernel<T>(kmgr_, ctx_, input, make_cspan(args_), axis_); | |||
| ), DALI_FAIL(make_string("Unsupported data type: ", input.type().id()))); // NOLINT | |||
| int64_t max_ndct = 0; | |||
| for (int i = 0; i < nsamples_; ++i) { | |||
| for (int i = 0; i < input.ntensor(); ++i) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In such instances we should always take the output size, not the input.
Rationale: if we use output size, all we risk is reading garbage or illegal read; if we use input size, we run the risk of corrupting memory and the function becomes a potential attack route.
|
!build |
|
CI MESSAGE: [1865197]: BUILD STARTED |
|
CI MESSAGE: [1865197]: BUILD PASSED |
jantonguirao
reviewed
Dec 7, 2020
| @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ bool MFCC<GPUBackend>::SetupImpl(std::vector<OutputDesc> &output_desc, | |||
| output_desc = detail::SetupKernel<T>(kmgr_, ctx_, input, make_cspan(args_), axis_); | |||
| ), DALI_FAIL(make_string("Unsupported data type: ", input.type().id()))); // NOLINT | |||
| int64_t max_ndct = 0; | |||
| for (int i = 0; i < nsamples_; ++i) { | |||
| for (int i = 0; i < output_desc[0].shape.num_samples(); ++i) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I removed the member field, the coverity was complaining that it is not initialized, and I didn't see it in @szalpal PR, so decided to go with the flow of the rework.
jantonguirao
approved these changes
Dec 7, 2020
banasraf
approved these changes
Dec 7, 2020
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
16512016, 16512037, 16512220, 16512041, ....
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Lecki klecki@nvidia.com
Why we need this PR?
Sprinkle the utility functions with CUDA_CALL(...);
What happened in this PR?
only utils, the
*_test.*andoperators/**are checked already andkernels/**are the responsibility of the userNA
CI
NO
JIRA TASK: [Use DALI-1724 or NA]