[libvirt] [PATCH] conf: Add check to avoid a NULL compare for SysfsPath

If the two sysfs_path are both NULL, there may be an incorrect object returned for virNodeDeviceObjListFindBySysfsPath(). This check exists in old interface virNodeDeviceFindBySysfsPath(). e.g. virNodeDeviceFindBySysfsPath(virNodeDeviceObjListPtr devs, const char *sysfs_path) { ... if ((devs->objs[i]->def->sysfs_path != NULL) && (STREQ(devs->objs[i]->def->sysfs_path, sysfs_path))) { ... } Signed-off-by: Cheng Lin <cheng.lin130@zte.com.cn> --- src/conf/virnodedeviceobj.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/conf/virnodedeviceobj.c b/src/conf/virnodedeviceobj.c index c8ad131..2e40de5 100644 --- a/src/conf/virnodedeviceobj.c +++ b/src/conf/virnodedeviceobj.c @@ -207,7 +207,8 @@ virNodeDeviceObjListFindBySysfsPathCallback(const void *payload, int want = 0; virObjectLock(obj); - if (STREQ_NULLABLE(obj->def->sysfs_path, sysfs_path)) + if ((obj->def->sysfs_path != NULL) && + (STREQ_NULLABLE(obj->def->sysfs_path, sysfs_path))) want = 1; virObjectUnlock(obj); return want; -- 1.8.3.1

On 01/18/2019 02:49 AM, Cheng Lin wrote:
If the two sysfs_path are both NULL, there may be an incorrect object returned for virNodeDeviceObjListFindBySysfsPath().
This check exists in old interface virNodeDeviceFindBySysfsPath(). e.g. virNodeDeviceFindBySysfsPath(virNodeDeviceObjListPtr devs, const char *sysfs_path) { ... if ((devs->objs[i]->def->sysfs_path != NULL) && (STREQ(devs->objs[i]->def->sysfs_path, sysfs_path))) { ... }
Signed-off-by: Cheng Lin <cheng.lin130@zte.com.cn> --- src/conf/virnodedeviceobj.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/conf/virnodedeviceobj.c b/src/conf/virnodedeviceobj.c index c8ad131..2e40de5 100644 --- a/src/conf/virnodedeviceobj.c +++ b/src/conf/virnodedeviceobj.c @@ -207,7 +207,8 @@ virNodeDeviceObjListFindBySysfsPathCallback(const void *payload, int want = 0;
virObjectLock(obj); - if (STREQ_NULLABLE(obj->def->sysfs_path, sysfs_path)) + if ((obj->def->sysfs_path != NULL) && + (STREQ_NULLABLE(obj->def->sysfs_path, sysfs_path))) want = 1; virObjectUnlock(obj); return want;
Thanks, I reformatted to this and pushed: @@ -207,7 +207,8 @@ virNodeDeviceObjListFindBySysfsPathCallback(const void *payload, int want = 0; virObjectLock(obj); - if (STREQ_NULLABLE(obj->def->sysfs_path, sysfs_path)) + if (obj->def->sysfs_path && + STREQ_NULLABLE(obj->def->sysfs_path, sysfs_path)) want = 1; virObjectUnlock(obj); return want; What kind of devices are you seeing that don't have a sysfs_path I? Seems like there's lots of places internally we expect it to be there, but some others where we don't, so people must have hit similar issues before, but I don't think I see an example in the udev output on my machine - Cole

> On 01/18/2019 02:49 AM, Cheng Lin wrote: > > If the two sysfs_path are both NULL, there may be an incorrect > > object returned for virNodeDeviceObjListFindBySysfsPath(). > > > > This check exists in old interface virNodeDeviceFindBySysfsPath(). > > e.g. > > virNodeDeviceFindBySysfsPath(virNodeDeviceObjListPtr devs, > > const char *sysfs_path) > > { > > ... > > if ((devs->objs[i]->def->sysfs_path != NULL) && > > (STREQ(devs->objs[i]->def->sysfs_path, sysfs_path))) { > > ... > > } > > > > Signed-off-by: Cheng Lin <cheng.lin130@zte.com.cn> > > --- > > src/conf/virnodedeviceobj.c | 3 ++- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/src/conf/virnodedeviceobj.c b/src/conf/virnodedeviceobj.c > > index c8ad131..2e40de5 100644 > > --- a/src/conf/virnodedeviceobj.c > > +++ b/src/conf/virnodedeviceobj.c > > @@ -207,7 +207,8 @@ virNodeDeviceObjListFindBySysfsPathCallback(const void *payload, > > int want = 0; > > > > virObjectLock(obj); > - if (STREQ_NULLABLE(obj->def->sysfs_path, sysfs_path)) > > + if ((obj->def->sysfs_path != NULL) && > > + (STREQ_NULLABLE(obj->def->sysfs_path, sysfs_path))) > > want = 1; > > virObjectUnlock(obj); > > return want; > > > > Thanks, I reformatted to this and pushed: > > @@ -207,7 +207,8 @@ virNodeDeviceObjListFindBySysfsPathCallback(const > void *payload, > int want = 0; > > virObjectLock(obj); > - if (STREQ_NULLABLE(obj->def->sysfs_path, sysfs_path)) > + if (obj->def->sysfs_path && > + STREQ_NULLABLE(obj->def->sysfs_path, sysfs_path)) > want = 1; > virObjectUnlock(obj); > return want; > > What kind of devices are you seeing that don't have a sysfs_path I? > Seems like there's lots of places internally we expect it to be there, > but some others where we don't, so people must have hit similar issues > before, but I don't think I see an example in the udev output on my machine The new interface handles null parameters differently from the old one. Potential risks may be introduced. > - Cole
participants (3)
-
Cheng Lin
-
cheng.lin130@zte.com.cn
-
Cole Robinson