On (Mon) 17 Dec 2012 [14:14:17], Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Amit Shah <amit.s...@redhat.com> writes:
>
> > Stuff the cpkt before calling send_control_msg(). it should not be
> > concerned about contents, just send across the buffer.
> >
> > A few code refactorings recently have made mkaing this change easier
> > than earlier.
Ugh, I'll fix the typo and incoherent language here before merging.
> > Coverity and clang have flagged this code several times in the past
> > (cpkt->id not set before send_control_event() passed it on to
> > send_control_msg()). This will finally eliminate the false-positive.
> >
> > CC: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Amit Shah <amit.s...@redhat.com>
>
> Patch makes sense to me, and the Coverity defect report is gone.
Thanks for checking!
> However, it now worries find_port_by_id() in remove_port() could return
> a null pointer, which is then dereferenced. No idea why it didn't
> report that before. Obvious suppressor:
>
> diff --git a/hw/virtio-serial-bus.c b/hw/virtio-serial-bus.c
> index 47d0481..7ff7505 100644
> --- a/hw/virtio-serial-bus.c
> +++ b/hw/virtio-serial-bus.c
> @@ -826,6 +826,7 @@ static void remove_port(VirtIOSerial *vser, uint32_t
> port_id)
> vser->ports_map[i] &= ~(1U << (port_id % 32));
>
> port = find_port_by_id(vser, port_id);
> + assert(port);
> /* Flush out any unconsumed buffers first */
> discard_vq_data(port->ovq, &port->vser->vdev);
remove_port() is called by the hot-unplug qdev callback, and if the
port's missing from our tailq, something's gone wrong anyway. So this
patch makes sense too.
> Reviewed-by: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com>
Thanks!
Amit
