On 9/16/26 4:32 PM, Eric Farman wrote:
> Just like in vfio/ap, there is a non-fatal message that could be
> generated, with a stale pointer in the error object variable.
> 
> Unlike vfio/ap, there is no secondary message that could attempt
> to use it. Clear it in the same way, in case that ever changes.
> 
> Cc: [email protected]
> Fixes: 6178d4689a ("vfio-ccw: Permit missing IRQs")
> Signed-off-by: Eric Farman <[email protected]>
> ---
>  hw/vfio/ccw.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/hw/vfio/ccw.c b/hw/vfio/ccw.c
> index c3dc7c1962..8e29a3ae61 100644
> --- a/hw/vfio/ccw.c
> +++ b/hw/vfio/ccw.c
> @@ -604,8 +604,10 @@ static void vfio_ccw_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error 
> **errp)
>          /*
>           * Report this error, but do not make it a failing condition.
>           * Lack of this IRQ in the host does not prevent normal operation.
> +         * Clear the pointer, since the warning will release it.
>           */
>          warn_report_err(err);
> +        err = NULL;

OK, so this patch is ONLY a future-proofing change since err goes out of
scope right after this.
I'm OK with the change from a future-proofing perspective, but IMO it
does not merit a Fixes or a CC stable.

With those removed:

Reviewed-by: Matthew Rosato <[email protected]>

>      }
>  
>      return;


Reply via email to