[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [for-4.15] Re: [PATCH XENSTORE v1 00/10] Code analysis fixes
Hi Andrew, On 01/03/2021 19:39, Andrew Cooper wrote: On 01/03/2021 18:01, Julien Grall wrote:Hi, I have tagged the e-mail with 4.15 as I think we likely want some of the patches to be in the next release. As a minimum, we get the following: - patch #7: xenstore: handle do_mkdir and do_rm failure - patch #8: xenstore: add missing NULL check - patch #10: xs: add error handling The first two add missing NULL check in runtime code in XenStored. The 3rd one adds a missing NULL check in xs_is_domain_introduced() in libxenstore (can be used at runtime by xenpaging at least). In addition to that, I would like to consider patch #3: xenstore: check formats of trace. It is allowing the compiler to check the format printf for trace(). This should be low-risk. For the rest is a mix of silencing coverity and potential errors either at init or in a standalone binaries. The init ones would be useful (patch #1, #5, #9) for Xenstored LiveUpdate as they would be potential triggered when upgrading the binary. But I am not sure whether we consider LiveUpdate supported. Any thoughts?Live Update is a headline feature, even if only tech preview. I thought it was a tech preview but I couldn't find the statement in SUPPORT.MD. I guess we should update it before 4.15 is released. I'd say that all bugfixes are fair game, and low risk. All these fixes (other than the evtchn one which has an outstanding question) look to be reasonable to take. They're all simple and obvious fixes pointed out by static analysis. That's a fair point. I wanted to set an order as I know the rules are getting tighter. So this gives an opportunity to Ian to have enough data to decide what's the best. Cheers, -- Julien Grall
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |