Re: [libvirt] [PATCHv2 5/7] virSocketAddrGetIpPrefix 0.0.0.0 special case

On 01/15/2015 04:25 AM, Cédric Bosdonnat wrote: > If 0.0.0.0 address is provided, then the returned prefix should be 0, > rather than 8. > --- > src/util/virsocketaddr.c | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/src/util/virsocketaddr.c b/src/util/virsocketaddr.c > index c5584af..e7870bf 100644 > --- a/src/util/virsocketaddr.c > +++ b/src/util/virsocketaddr.c > @@ -832,6 +832,12 @@ virSocketAddrGetIpPrefix(const virSocketAddr *address, > */ > unsigned char octet > = ntohl(address->data.inet4.sin_addr.s_addr) >> 24; > + > + /* If address is 0.0.0.0, we surely want to have 0 prefix for > + * the default route. */ > + if (address->data.inet4.sin_addr.s_addr == 0) > + return 0; > + > if ((octet & 0x80) == 0) { > /* Class A network */ > return 8; > So it seems after Laine's comments on this you added: + if (address->data.inet6.sin6_addr.s6_addr == 0) + return 0; which Coverity flags as: 852 } else if (VIR_SOCKET_ADDR_IS_FAMILY(address, AF_INET6)) { (1) Event array_null: Comparing an array to null is not useful: "address->data.inet6.sin6_addr.__in6_u.__u6_addr8 == NULL". 853 if (address->data.inet6.sin6_addr.s6_addr == 0) Since s6_addr is a pointer - is this supposed to be a NULL comparison or perhaps are you looking for a specific character [0] or all characters being 0?