> On 7 Mar 2018, at 07:40, Frediano Ziglio <fziglio@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>
>> Introduced in 548577dc8adae1a558
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Uri Lublin <uril@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> src/spice-streaming-agent.cpp | 5 +++++
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/src/spice-streaming-agent.cpp b/src/spice-streaming-agent.cpp
>> index b39782c..e25d47a 100644
>> --- a/src/spice-streaming-agent.cpp
>> +++ b/src/spice-streaming-agent.cpp
>> @@ -145,6 +145,11 @@ static void handle_stream_error(size_t len)
>> std::to_string(sizeof(StreamMsgNotifyError))
>> + ")");
>> }
>>
>> + // This struct inherits StreamMsgNotifyError. Its memory layout is:
>> + // offset 0: StreamMsgNotifyError.error_code (a uint32_t)
>> + // offset 4: StreamMsgNotifyError.msg and also msg.msg (a
>> uint8_t[1024]).
>> + // Both StreamMsgNotifyError.msg and msg.msg point to the same
>> + // memory location (practically local msg overrides inherited msg).
>> struct : StreamMsgNotifyError {
>> uint8_t msg[1024];
>> } msg;
>
> When I sent my suggestion I didn't wanted to clash with inherited field,
> just didn't invented a new name.
> Maybe would be easier and more clear to rename to msg_buffer or similar
> to avoid the confusion?
Would fix the issue I pointed out. But as I mentioned there, gcc emkits a warning that we access the array out of bounds (msg has zero length). You can silence that using a temporary char * pointer.
>
> Frediano
> _______________________________________________
> Spice-devel mailing list
> Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
_______________________________________________
Spice-devel mailing list
Spice-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel