On 02.10.2013 10:44, Laine Stump wrote: > 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(-) >> > 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). Good point. I've reversed the order of patches and pushed. Thanks! Michal -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list