On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 09:12:36 +0100, Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > --- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
> > +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
> > @@ -662,6 +662,7 @@ static int virtio_transport_reset(struct vsock_sock *vsk,
> > */
> > static int virtio_transport_reset_no_sock(struct virtio_vsock_pkt *pkt)
> > {
> > + const struct virtio_transport *t;
> > struct virtio_vsock_pkt_info info = {
> > .op = VIRTIO_VSOCK_OP_RST,
> > .type = le16_to_cpu(pkt->hdr.type),
> > @@ -680,7 +681,11 @@ static int virtio_transport_reset_no_sock(struct virtio_vsock_pkt *pkt)
> > if (!pkt)
> > return -ENOMEM;
> >
> > - return virtio_transport_get_ops()->send_pkt(pkt);
> > + t = virtio_transport_get_ops();
> > + if (!t)
> > + return -ENOTCONN;
>
> Should be better to do this check before the virtio_transport_alloc_pkt?
>
> Otherwise, I think we should free that packet before to return -ENOTCONN.
Right! :D
I will send a second version.
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
