07.08.2017 14:55, Eric Blake wrote:
On 08/04/2017 10:14 AM, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
We set s->reply.handle to 0 on one error path and don't set on another.
For consistancy and to avoid assert in nbd_read_reply_entry let's
set s->reply.handle to 0 in case of wrong handle too.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsement...@virtuozzo.com>
---
block/nbd-client.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Can this assertion be triggered now (presumably, with a broken server)?
I'm trying to figure out if this is 2.10 material.
[Urgh. If a broken server is able to cause an assertion failure that
causes a client to abort on an assertion failure, that probably deserves
a CVE]
Hmm looks like I've mistaken, if handle is wrong than read_reply_co
should be already finished, so it's impossible
--
Best regards,
Vladimir
