On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 01:18:19PM +0100, Erik Skultety wrote: > It doesn't make sense to pass a target buffer into an API, declaring its > size as 0 and expect some meaningful result. Since this used to work > pre-Glib era, we shouldn't end with an error, but we can return 0 > for the number of domains immediately, instead of calling into the > daemon, which is exactly what the daemon would have returned anyway. Passing in size as 0 is going to be normal practice, given the calling convention of this API design. > > Signed-off-by: Erik Skultety <eskultet@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > src/libvirt-domain.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/src/libvirt-domain.c b/src/libvirt-domain.c > index 02622cb2ca..0def40fdf7 100644 > --- a/src/libvirt-domain.c > +++ b/src/libvirt-domain.c > @@ -62,6 +62,9 @@ virConnectListDomains(virConnectPtr conn, int *ids, int maxids) > virCheckNonNullArgGoto(ids, error); > virCheckNonNegativeArgGoto(maxids, error); > > + if (maxids == 0) > + return 0; This is too late really, as we alrady checked 'ids'. IMHO, we should only mandate a non-NULL 'ids' parameter when maxids > 0 a few lines earlier All the other legacy APIs share the same validation flaw so will also need fixing. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
