On 08/05/13 20:56, John Ferlan wrote:
On 05/06/2013 08:45 AM, Osier Yang wrote:
> Introduced by commit 244ce462e29, which refactored the helper for wwn
> reading, however, it forgot to change the old "strndup" and
"sizeof(buf)",
> "sizeof(buf)" operates on the fixed length array ("buf") in the
old code,
> but now "buf" is a pointer.
>
> Before the fix:
>
> % virsh nodedev-dumpxml scsi_host5
> <device>
> <name>scsi_host5</name>
> <parent>pci_0000_04_00_1</parent>
> <capability type='scsi_host'>
> <host>5</host>
> <capability type='fc_host'>
> <wwnn>2001001b</wwnn>
> <wwpn>2101001b</wwpn>
> <fabric_wwn>2001000d</fabric_wwn>
> </capability>
> </capability>
> </device>
>
> With the fix:
>
> % virsh nodedev-dumpxml scsi_host5
> <device>
> <name>scsi_host5</name>
> <parent>pci_0000_04_00_1</parent>
> <capability type='scsi_host'>
> <host>5</host>
> <capability type='fc_host'>
> <wwnn>0x2001001b32a9da4e</wwnn>
> <wwpn>0x2101001b32a9da4e</wwpn>
> <fabric_wwn>0x2001000dec9877c1</fabric_wwn>
> </capability>
> </capability>
> </device>
> ---
> src/util/virutil.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
ACK for technically right; however, since this problem is in 1.0.4 is
there an "effect" where there is a written buffer that has the shorter
(and wrong) wwnn/wwpn that could cause "issues" on the read (and
possible compare) side now??
Yes, fortunately it seems no one used it yet, at least I saw no
bug.