On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 07:44:20 -0400, John Ferlan wrote:
>
>
> On 06/04/2015 07:28 AM, Peter Krempa wrote:
> > Coverity rightfully determined that in commit 3d021381c71221e563182f03
> > I made a mistake in the first check if @persDef is not NULL is
> > dereferencing it rather than checking.
> > ---
> >
> > Pushed as trivial.
> >
> > src/conf/domain_conf.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/src/conf/domain_conf.c b/src/conf/domain_conf.c
> > index 77e198c..68d28f6 100644
> > --- a/src/conf/domain_conf.c
> > +++ b/src/conf/domain_conf.c
> > @@ -2927,7 +2927,7 @@ virDomainObjGetDefs(virDomainObjPtr vm,
> > if (liveDef)
> > *liveDef = NULL;
> >
> > - if (*persDef)
> > + if (persDef)
> > *persDef = NULL;
> >
> > if (virDomainObjUpdateModificationImpact(vm, &flags) < 0)
> >
>
>
> yes - this makes Coverity happy... Still curious about :
>
> + if (flags & VIR_DOMAIN_AFFECT_LIVE) {
> + if (liveDef)
> + *liveDef = vm->def;
> +
> + if (persDef)
> + *liveDef = vm->newDef;
>
>
> Coverity doesn't flag the second *liveDef setting, but from just reading
> the code it seems if NULL is passed for liveDef and something is passed
> for persDef, then we could run into an issue here deref'ing liveDef
>
Yup, I didn't originally notice this in the previous mail. I've already
prepared a fix for this.
Peter
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list