[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Fix issues affecting Xen 9pfs discovered by Coverity
On 05/08/2017 05:00 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>> Directly calling fcntl(F_SETFD) without first reading fcntl(F_GETFD) is >>> (theoretically) incorrect. Better might be using qemu_set_cloexec() >>> instead of open-coding something. >> >> Makes sense but the unchecked return of fcntl, discovered by Coverity, >> would remain unfixed by calling qemu_set_cloexec here. I don't think I >> am up for fixing all the call sites of qemu_set_cloexec. >> >> I am going to drop this change, and resend this patch was only the other >> two fixes, fixing 1374836 only. > > Unless you would be fine with: > > diff --git a/util/oslib-posix.c b/util/oslib-posix.c > index 4d9189e..16894ad 100644 > --- a/util/oslib-posix.c > +++ b/util/oslib-posix.c > @@ -182,7 +182,9 @@ void qemu_set_cloexec(int fd) > { > int f; > f = fcntl(fd, F_GETFD); > - fcntl(fd, F_SETFD, f | FD_CLOEXEC); > + assert(f != -1); > + f = fcntl(fd, F_SETFD, f | FD_CLOEXEC); > + assert(f != -1); Seems reasonable to me, but I don't know if anyone else would object. Changes semantics if someone ever calls qemu_set_cloexec(-1) (previously it would ignore the EBADF failures, now it will abort) - such callers are arguably broken, so that's okay by me. -- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org Attachment:
signature.asc _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |