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