On 11/15/18 6:48 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 17 October 2018 at 10:51, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 04:20:18PM +0300, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
>>> Theoretically possible that we finish the skipping loop with bs = NULL
>>> and the following code will crash trying to dereference it. Fix that.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsement...@virtuozzo.com>
>>> ---
>>> migration/block-dirty-bitmap.c | 4 ++++
>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/migration/block-dirty-bitmap.c b/migration/block-dirty-bitmap.c
>>> index 477826330c..6de808f95f 100644
>>> --- a/migration/block-dirty-bitmap.c
>>> +++ b/migration/block-dirty-bitmap.c
>>> @@ -288,6 +288,10 @@ static int init_dirty_bitmap_migration(void)
>>> bs = backing_bs(bs);
>>> }
>>>
>>> + if (!bs || bs->implicit) {
>>> + continue;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> for (bitmap = bdrv_dirty_bitmap_next(bs, NULL); bitmap;
>>> bitmap = bdrv_dirty_bitmap_next(bs, bitmap))
>>> {
>>
>> Previous discussion:
>> http://qemu.11.n7.nabble.com/PATCH-migration-Appease-coverity-skip-empty-block-trees-td582504.html
>>
>> I've CCed John so he can take a look.
>
> So have you block-layer folks figured out how you want to address
> this Coverity issue yet?
>
> thanks
> -- PMM
>
I'm sorry, Peter.
I've let this one slip through the cracks many times and I thought it
had been handled.
I'll look now.
