On 10/02/2013 03:34 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> So far the virNetDevBandwidthEqual() expected both ->in and ->out items
> to be allocated for both @a and @b compared. This is not necessary true
> for all our code. For instance, running 'update-device' twice over a NIC
> with the very same XML results in SIGSEGV-ing in this function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> src/util/virnetdevbandwidth.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/util/virnetdevbandwidth.c b/src/util/virnetdevbandwidth.c
> index 42b0a50..17f4fa3 100644
> --- a/src/util/virnetdevbandwidth.c
> +++ b/src/util/virnetdevbandwidth.c
> @@ -335,16 +335,30 @@ virNetDevBandwidthEqual(virNetDevBandwidthPtr a,
> return false;
>
> /* in */
> - if (a->in->average != b->in->average ||
> - a->in->peak != b->in->peak ||
> - a->in->burst != b->in->burst)
> + if (a->in) {
> + if (!b->in)
> + return false;
> +
> + if (a->in->average != b->in->average ||
> + a->in->peak != b->in->peak ||
> + a->in->burst != b->in->burst)
> + return false;
> + } else if (b->in) {
> return false;
> + }
>
> /*out*/
> - if (a->out->average != b->out->average ||
> - a->out->peak != b->out->peak ||
> - a->out->burst != b->out->burst)
> + if (a->out) {
> + if (!b->out)
> + return false;
> +
> + if (a->out->average != b->out->average ||
> + a->out->peak != b->out->peak ||
> + a->out->burst != b->out->burst)
> + return false;
> + } else if (b->out) {
> return false;
> + }
>
> return true;
> }
ACK. Could this lead to a segv prior to applying the previous patch? Or
does it only become a problem once you support bandwidth change in
qemuChangeNet?
In either case, I think this patch should be pushed upstream *before*
patch 1/2, so that we don't create a window in the history where a new
segv is introduced (just in case someone is doing a bisect and hits on
that particular revision).
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list