On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 12:26:17PM +0100, Chris Lalancette wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 12:04:34PM +0100, Chris Lalancette wrote:
> >> Index: src/storage_driver.c
> >> ===================================================================
> >> RCS file: /data/cvs/libvirt/src/storage_driver.c,v
> >> retrieving revision 1.13
> >> diff -u -r1.13 storage_driver.c
> >> --- a/src/storage_driver.c 21 Oct 2008 17:15:53 -0000 1.13
> >> +++ b/src/storage_driver.c 31 Oct 2008 10:09:29 -0000
> >> @@ -963,11 +963,25 @@
> >> virStorageDriverStatePtr driver =
> >> (virStorageDriverStatePtr)conn->storagePrivateData;
> >> unsigned int i;
> >> + char *stable_path;
> >>
> >> for (i = 0 ; i < driver->pools.count ; i++) {
> >> if (virStoragePoolObjIsActive(driver->pools.objs[i])) {
> >> - virStorageVolDefPtr vol =
> >> - virStorageVolDefFindByPath(driver->pools.objs[i], path);
> >> + virStorageVolDefPtr vol;
> >> + virStorageBackendPoolOptionsPtr options;
> >> +
> >> + options = virStorageBackendPoolOptionsForType(driver->pools.objs[i]->def->type);
> >> + if (options == NULL)
> >> + continue;
> >> +
> >> + if (options->flags & VIR_STORAGE_BACKEND_POOL_STABLE_PATH)
> >> + stable_path = virStorageBackendStablePath(conn, driver->pools.objs[i], (char *)path);
> >> + else
> >> + stable_path = (char *)path;
> >> +
> >> + vol = virStorageVolDefFindByPath(driver->pools.objs[i], stable_path);
> >> + if (stable_path != path)
> >> + VIR_FREE(stable_path);
> >
> > This VIR_FREE check is slightly evil, how about something more like
>
> Well, I originally stole this pointer comparison from storage_backend_iscsi.c
> which does the same thing. While I agree that the code below is more clear, it
> actually has a subtle bug; if you pass in, say "/dev/sdc", and the pool target
> path is of type "/dev", then virStorageBackendStablePath() will return the
> original pointer, not a copy. So in the below code, you would actually end up
> freeing path, not a copy of path.
>
> Personally, I think those are bad semantics for virStorageBackendStablePath;
> assuming it succeeds, you should always be able to know that you have a copy,
> regardless of whether the copy is the same as the original. Should I change
> virStorageBackendStablePath to those semantics, in which case your below code
> would then be correct?
Yes, I think that's worth doing - will also avoid the cast in the input
arg there
Daniel
--
|: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|
--
Libvir-list mailing list
Libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list