On Tue, 13 Jun 2017 12:24:18 +0200 Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 05:32:28PM +0200, Michal Suchanek wrote: > > There is weird mix of logic in lscpu-dmi.c which sometimes returns > > 0 and sometimes -1 on error. Since most checks are if (rc) goto > > done; this bails out early on error skipping some detection > > methods. Further, in lscpu.c all following detections are guarder > > by if(hyper) so returnning -1 causes all following methods to be > > skipped. The hyper value is used as array index so -1 is out of > > bounds. > > Yes, that's bug. > > Not applied. > > I don't think this is correct. We need to differentiate between > > 1/ DMI not in /sys (rc == -1) > 2/ DMI available, but nothing detected (rc == HYPER_NONE) > > For the 1/ we need to try /dev/mem. > > I did some changes to the code to make it more robust. Now > read_hypervisor_dmi() does not return -1 at all. > > Please, test it. Thanks! Looks ok. This does not crash on arm64 with the broken kernel and we will eventually get testing of the other archs as well. Not returning -1 should fix them. Thanks Michal -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
