Re: [libvirt PATCH] qemu: tpm: do not update profile name for transient domains

On Tue, Dec 03, 2024 at 12:06:37 +0100, Ján Tomko wrote: > If we do not have a persistent definition, there's no point in > looking for it since we cannot store it. > > This fixes the crash when starting a transient domain. > > https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-69774 > > Fixes: d79542eec669eb9c449bb8228179e7a87e768017 > Signed-off-by: Ján Tomko <jtomko(a)redhat.com&gt; > --- > src/qemu/qemu_extdevice.c | 5 ++++- > src/qemu/qemu_tpm.c | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_extdevice.c b/src/qemu/qemu_extdevice.c > index a6f31f9773..d4b6e11e0b 100644 > --- a/src/qemu/qemu_extdevice.c > +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_extdevice.c > @@ -190,7 +190,10 @@ qemuExtDevicesStart(virQEMUDriver *driver, > > for (i = 0; i < def->ntpms; i++) { > virDomainTPMDef *tpm = def->tpms[i]; > - virDomainTPMDef *persistentTPMDef = persistentDef->tpms[i]; > + virDomainTPMDef *persistentTPMDef = NULL; > + > + if (persistentDef) > + persistentTPMDef = persistentDef->tpms[i]; And what if the persistent definition has a different number of tpm devices? We might be starting a domain using custom XML which is completely different from the persistent definition. And even if both active and persistent definition contains the same number of tpm devices, would there be a problem if the devices themselves did not match (if it can happen, I know mostly nothing about tpm)?