On 06/09/13 18:30, Liuji (Jeremy) wrote:
The parameter of virBitmapFree function is just a pointer, not a
pointer of pointer.
The second VIR_FREE on virBitmapFree only assign NULL to the formal parameter.
After calling the virBitmapFree function, the actual parameter are still not NULL.
There are many code segment don't assign NULL to the formal parameter after calling
the virBitmapFree function. This will bring potential risks.
A problem scenario:
1) The XML of VM contain the below segment:
<numatune>
<memory mode='preferred' placement='auto'
nodeset='0'/>
</numatune>
2)virsh create the VM
3)In the virDomainDefParseXML funtion:
/* Ignore 'nodeset' if 'placement' is 'auto'
finally */
if (placement_mode == VIR_NUMA_TUNE_MEM_PLACEMENT_MODE_AUTO) {
virBitmapFree(def->numatune.memory.nodemask);
def->numatune.memory.nodemask = NULL;
}
4)Then, virsh destroy the VM. In the virDomainDefFree funtion, it also call the
virBitmapFree function to free the nodemask:
virBitmapFree(def->numatune.memory.nodemask);
But after this call, the value of def->numatune.memory.nodemask is still not NULL.
This will generate an exception.
>From d2b69b130bca89df85005d395c6d45d8df0b74f1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Liuji (Jeremy)" <jeremy.liu(a)huawei.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 04:49:30 -0400
Subject: [PATCH] virBitmapFree: Change the function to a macro
The parameter of virBitmapFree function is just a pointer, not a pointer of pointer.
The second VIR_FREE on virBitmapFree only assign NULL to the formal parameter.
After calling the virBitmapFree function, the actual parameter are still not NULL.
There are many code segment don't assign NULL to the formal parameter after calling
the virBitmapFree function. This will bring potential risks.
Regardless of what the problem is......
Signed-off-by: Liuji (Jeremy) <jeremy.liu(a)huawei.com>
---
src/util/virbitmap.c | 21 ---------------------
src/util/virbitmap.h | 21 ++++++++++++++++-----
2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/util/virbitmap.c b/src/util/virbitmap.c
index 7e1cd02..cde502f 100644
--- a/src/util/virbitmap.c
+++ b/src/util/virbitmap.c
@@ -40,13 +40,6 @@
#define VIR_FROM_THIS VIR_FROM_NONE
-struct _virBitmap {
- size_t max_bit;
- size_t map_len;
- unsigned long *map;
-};
-
-
#define VIR_BITMAP_BITS_PER_UNIT ((int) sizeof(unsigned long) * CHAR_BIT)
#define VIR_BITMAP_UNIT_OFFSET(b) ((b) / VIR_BITMAP_BITS_PER_UNIT)
#define VIR_BITMAP_BIT_OFFSET(b) ((b) % VIR_BITMAP_BITS_PER_UNIT)
@@ -88,20 +81,6 @@ virBitmapPtr virBitmapNew(size_t size)
return bitmap;
}
-/**
- * virBitmapFree:
- * @bitmap: previously allocated bitmap
- *
- * Free @bitmap previously allocated by virBitmapNew.
- */
-void virBitmapFree(virBitmapPtr bitmap)
-{
- if (bitmap) {
- VIR_FREE(bitmap->map);
- VIR_FREE(bitmap);
- }
-}
-
int virBitmapCopy(virBitmapPtr dst, virBitmapPtr src)
{
diff --git a/src/util/virbitmap.h b/src/util/virbitmap.h
index b682523..9b93b88 100644
--- a/src/util/virbitmap.h
+++ b/src/util/virbitmap.h
@@ -28,6 +28,22 @@
# include <sys/types.h>
+struct _virBitmap {
+ size_t max_bit;
+ size_t map_len;
+ unsigned long *map;
+};
+
+/*
+ * Free previously allocated bitmap
+ */
+#define virBitmapFree(bitmap) \
+ do { \
+ if (bitmap) { \
+ VIR_FREE((bitmap)->map); \
+ VIR_FREE(bitmap); \
+ } \
+ } while (0);
... What does this make difference? Unless I missed something, what you
do is
just changing the function into a macro. And I don't see any benifit
from it.
Osier