Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 1/5] virDomainNumaGetNodeDistance: Fix input arguments validation
On 11/22/2017 12:22 AM, John Ferlan wrote:
On 11/14/2017 09:47 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
> There's no point in checking if numa->mem_nodes[node].ndistances
> is set if we check for numa->mem_nodes[node].distances. However,
> it makes sense to check if the sibling node caller passed falls
> within boundaries.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik <mprivozn(a)redhat.com>
> ---
> src/conf/numa_conf.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/conf/numa_conf.c b/src/conf/numa_conf.c
> index 7bba4120b..5f0b3f9ed 100644
> --- a/src/conf/numa_conf.c
> +++ b/src/conf/numa_conf.c
> @@ -1154,7 +1154,7 @@ virDomainNumaGetNodeDistance(virDomainNumaPtr numa,
> */
> if (!distances ||
> !distances[cellid].value ||
> - !numa->mem_nodes[node].ndistances)
> + node >= numa->nmem_nodes)
If @distances can only be set if "node < numa->nmem_nodes", then how
could "node >= numa->nmem_nodes" ever be true and @distances be non
NULL? IOW: I see no need for the check... This former condition also
trips across my "favorite" condition check of "if !intValue"
substituting for "if intValue == 0" <sigh>.
Ah right. This patch makes no sense. I don't even know what was I
thinking :-)
But now as I'm looking at the code, it might be worth to check if
@cellid < numa->nmem_nodes; We check @node but not @cellid.
Michal