On Mon, 28 Mar 2011, Feiran Zheng wrote: > On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 9:42 PM, Stefano Stabellini > <stefano.stabell...@eu.citrix.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 27 Mar 2011, Feiran Zheng wrote: > >> Bug fix: routines 'ioreq_runio_qemu_sync' and 'ioreq_runio_qemu_aio' > >> won't call 'ioreq_unmap' or 'ioreq_finish' on errors, leaving ioreq in > >> the blkdev->inflight list and a leak. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Feiran Zheng <famc...@gmail.com> > >> --- > >> hw/xen_disk.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++----- > >> 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/hw/xen_disk.c b/hw/xen_disk.c > >> index 445bf03..7940fab 100644 > >> --- a/hw/xen_disk.c > >> +++ b/hw/xen_disk.c > >> @@ -309,8 +309,10 @@ static int ioreq_runio_qemu_sync(struct ioreq *ioreq) > >> int i, rc, len = 0; > >> off_t pos; > >> > >> - if (ioreq->req.nr_segments && ioreq_map(ioreq) == -1) > >> - goto err; > >> + if (ioreq->req.nr_segments) { > >> + if (ioreq_map(ioreq) == -1) > >> + goto err_no_map; > >> + } > >> if (ioreq->presync) > >> bdrv_flush(blkdev->bs); > >> > > > > this change is just to make the code clearer and easier to read, right? > > I think so. > > > > > > >> @@ -364,6 +366,9 @@ static int ioreq_runio_qemu_sync(struct ioreq *ioreq) > >> return 0; > >> > >> err: > >> + ioreq_unmap(ioreq); > >> +err_no_map: > >> + ioreq_finish(ioreq); > >> ioreq->status = BLKIF_RSP_ERROR; > >> return -1; > >> } > >> @@ -392,8 +397,10 @@ static int ioreq_runio_qemu_aio(struct ioreq *ioreq) > >> { > >> struct XenBlkDev *blkdev = ioreq->blkdev; > >> > >> - if (ioreq->req.nr_segments && ioreq_map(ioreq) == -1) > >> - goto err; > >> + if (ioreq->req.nr_segments) { > >> + if (ioreq_map(ioreq) == -1) > >> + goto err_no_map; > >> + } > >> > >> ioreq->aio_inflight++; > >> if (ioreq->presync) > >> @@ -425,9 +432,14 @@ static int ioreq_runio_qemu_aio(struct ioreq *ioreq) > >> qemu_aio_complete(ioreq, 0); > >> > >> return 0; > >> + > >> +err_no_map: > >> + ioreq_finish(ioreq); > >> + ioreq->status = BLKIF_RSP_ERROR; > >> + return -1; > >> > > > > why aren't you calling ioreq_unmap before ioreq_finish, like in the > > previous case? > > > > > > > It seems not a must but if call qemu_aio_complete, the error info can > be printed, I thought it may be helpful.
I am not sure I understand what you mean here because in case of error we don't call qemu_aio_complete at all in the err_no_map code path.