https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1146837
Resolve a crash in libvirtd resulting from commit id 'a4bd62ad' (1.0.6)
which added parentaddr and unique_id to allow unique identification of
a scsi_host, but assumed that all the pool entries and the incoming
definition would be similarly defined. If the existing pool uses the
'name' attribute and an incoming pool is using the parentaddr/unique_id,
then the code will attempt to compare the existing name string against
the incoming name string which doesn't exist (is NULL) and results in
a core (STREQ).
Conversely, if the existing pool used the parentaddr/unique_id and the
to be defined pool used the name, then the comparison would be against
the parentaddr, but since the incoming pool doesn't have one - that would
leave the comparison against a parentaddr of all 0's and a unique_id of 0,
which will always comparison to fail. This means someone could define the
same source adapter for two pools
In order to resolve this, adjust the code to get the 'host#' to be used
by the storage scsi backend in order to check/start the pool and make sure
the incoming definition doesn't match any of the existing pool defs.
Signed-off-by: John Ferlan <jferlan(a)redhat.com>
---
src/conf/storage_conf.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/conf/storage_conf.c b/src/conf/storage_conf.c
index 36696a4..19c452b 100644
--- a/src/conf/storage_conf.c
+++ b/src/conf/storage_conf.c
@@ -2062,26 +2062,37 @@ virStoragePoolObjIsDuplicate(virStoragePoolObjListPtr pools,
return ret;
}
-static bool
-matchSCSIAdapterParent(virStoragePoolObjPtr pool,
- virStoragePoolDefPtr def)
+static int
+getSCSIHostNumber(virStoragePoolSourceAdapter adapter,
+ unsigned int *hostnum)
{
- virDevicePCIAddressPtr pooladdr =
- &pool->def->source.adapter.data.scsi_host.parentaddr;
- virDevicePCIAddressPtr defaddr =
- &def->source.adapter.data.scsi_host.parentaddr;
- int pool_unique_id =
- pool->def->source.adapter.data.scsi_host.unique_id;
- int def_unique_id =
- def->source.adapter.data.scsi_host.unique_id;
- if (pooladdr->domain == defaddr->domain &&
- pooladdr->bus == defaddr->bus &&
- pooladdr->slot == defaddr->slot &&
- pooladdr->function == defaddr->function &&
- pool_unique_id == def_unique_id) {
- return true;
- }
- return false;
+ int ret = -1;
+ unsigned int num;
+ char *name = NULL;
+
+ if (adapter.data.scsi_host.has_parent) {
+ virDevicePCIAddress addr = adapter.data.scsi_host.parentaddr;
+ unsigned int unique_id = adapter.data.scsi_host.unique_id;
+
+ if (!(name = virGetSCSIHostNameByParentaddr(addr.domain,
+ addr.bus,
+ addr.slot,
+ addr.function,
+ unique_id)))
+ goto cleanup;
A valid pool definition for an existing device can be refused because another
definition, the one we already accepted, is invalid. I think this is strange
behavior and I would rather allow duplicit pools if the user went through the
trouble of bypassing our checks.
Jan