libvir-list-bounces@redhat.com wrote on 04/14/2010 01:40:17 PM:
Please respond to "Daniel P. Berrange"
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 06:02:32PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
From: Jim Meyering <meyering@redhat.com>
* src/nwfilter/nwfilter_ebiptables_driver.c (ebiptablesApplyNewRules): Don't dereference a NULL or uninitialized pointer when given an empty list of rules. Add an sa_assert(inst) in each loop to tell clang that the uses of "inst[i]" are valid. --- src/nwfilter/nwfilter_ebiptables_driver.c | 8 +++++--- 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/nwfilter/nwfilter_ebiptables_driver.c b/src/ nwfilter/nwfilter_ebiptables_driver.c index b481b4c..f54099f 100644 --- a/src/nwfilter/nwfilter_ebiptables_driver.c +++ b/src/nwfilter/nwfilter_ebiptables_driver.c @@ -2834,11 +2834,11 @@ ebiptablesApplyNewRules(virConnectPtr conn ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED, bool haveIptables = false; bool haveIp6tables = false;
- if (inst) - qsort(inst, nruleInstances, sizeof(inst[0]), - ebiptablesRuleOrderSort); + if (nruleInstances > 1 && inst) + qsort(inst, nruleInstances, sizeof(inst[0]), ebiptablesRuleOrderSort);
for (i = 0; i < nruleInstances; i++) { + sa_assert (inst); if (inst[i]->ruleType == RT_EBTABLES) { if (inst[i]->chainprefix == CHAINPREFIX_HOST_IN_TEMP) chains_in |= (1 << inst[i]->neededProtocolChain); @@ -2881,6 +2881,7 @@ ebiptablesApplyNewRules(virConnectPtr conn ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED, goto tear_down_tmpebchains;
for (i = 0; i < nruleInstances; i++) + sa_assert (inst);
Due to this statement here I get segmentation faults for which there is no reason. I have no idea why that is but I have to deactivate this line for it to work again. The same is not true for the statement further above... So strange. Stefan