Jim Meyering wrote:
> Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 03:56:55PM +0100, Wolfgang Mauerer wrote:
>>> Jim Meyering wrote:
Clang found something that might be a real bug.
I suspect that ...drive.controller will always be at least one,
>>> it can - explanation below.
>>>
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 04:46:31PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote:
>
> However, there's more to it than that.
> The controller index, while technically "unsigned", may
> be derived from an expression like -1 / 7,
> since virDomainDiskDefAssignAddress does this:
>
> void
> virDomainDiskDefAssignAdd
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 03:56:55PM +0100, Wolfgang Mauerer wrote:
>> Jim Meyering wrote:
>> > Clang found something that might be a real bug.
>> > I suspect that ...drive.controller will always be at least one,
>> it can - explanation below.
>>
>> > but we should not hav
Jim Meyering wrote:
> Clang found something that might be a real bug.
> I suspect that ...drive.controller will always be at least one,
it can - explanation below.
> but we should not have to dive into the code trying to figure
> that out. It's easier/better here just to handle the potential trou
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 03:56:55PM +0100, Wolfgang Mauerer wrote:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
> > Clang found something that might be a real bug.
> > I suspect that ...drive.controller will always be at least one,
> it can - explanation below.
>
> > but we should not have to dive into the code trying to
According to Jim Meyering on 3/2/2010 9:54 AM:
> It's easier/better here just to handle the potential trouble:
>
> * src/qemu/qemu_driver.c (qemudDomainAttachSCSIDisk): Handle
> the (theoretical) case of an empty controller list, so that
> clang does not think the subsequent dereference of "cont"
Clang found something that might be a real bug.
I suspect that ...drive.controller will always be at least one,
but we should not have to dive into the code trying to figure
that out. It's easier/better here just to handle the potential trouble:
clang saw that if it *was* zero, then the following
