Re: [libvirt PATCH] qemu: tpm: do not update profile name for transient domains

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Dec 03, 2024 at 12:06:37 +0100, Ján Tomko wrote:
> If we do not have a persistent definition, there's no point in
> looking for it since we cannot store it.
> 
> This fixes the crash when starting a transient domain.
> 
> https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-69774
> 
> Fixes: d79542eec669eb9c449bb8228179e7a87e768017
> Signed-off-by: Ján Tomko <jtomko@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  src/qemu/qemu_extdevice.c | 5 ++++-
>  src/qemu/qemu_tpm.c       | 2 +-
>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_extdevice.c b/src/qemu/qemu_extdevice.c
> index a6f31f9773..d4b6e11e0b 100644
> --- a/src/qemu/qemu_extdevice.c
> +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_extdevice.c
> @@ -190,7 +190,10 @@ qemuExtDevicesStart(virQEMUDriver *driver,
>  
>      for (i = 0; i < def->ntpms; i++) {
>          virDomainTPMDef *tpm = def->tpms[i];
> -        virDomainTPMDef *persistentTPMDef = persistentDef->tpms[i];
> +        virDomainTPMDef *persistentTPMDef = NULL;
> +
> +        if (persistentDef)
> +            persistentTPMDef = persistentDef->tpms[i];

And what if the persistent definition has a different number of tpm
devices? We might be starting a domain using custom XML which is
completely different from the persistent definition.

And even if both active and persistent definition contains the same
number of tpm devices, would there be a problem if the devices
themselves did not match (if it can happen, I know mostly nothing about
tpm)?

Jirka




[Index of Archives]     [Virt Tools]     [Libvirt Users]     [Lib OS Info]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]

  Powered by Linux