On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 11:01:27AM +0100, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 10:39 AM Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 01:15:34PM +0100, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> > > diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c
> > > b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c
> > > index 5d3cce9e8744..9dae54698737 100644
> > > --- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c
> > > +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c
> > > @@ -75,6 +75,9 @@ static u32 virtio_transport_get_local_cid(void)
> > > {
> > > struct virtio_vsock *vsock = virtio_vsock_get();
> > >
> > > + if (!vsock)
> > > + return VMADDR_CID_ANY;
> > > +
> > > return vsock->guest_cid;
> > > }
> >
> > This looks unrelated to the rest of the patch. Why is it necessary?
>
> It is needed because the "the_virtio_vsock" returned by
> virtio_vsock_get() is initialized during the probe and freed during
> the removal.
> So, if we move the vsock_core_exit() in the virtio_vsock_exit(), can
> happen that the virtio_transport_get_local_cid() is called when the
> "the_virtio_vsock" is NULL.
>
> Do you think is better to split this patch?I'm curious which code paths reach virtio_transport_get_local_cid() after the virtio device has been removed. ioctl IOCTL_VM_SOCKETS_GET_LOCAL_CID does. Anything else? Stefan
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
