Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 4/4] rpc: Fix potentially segfaults

2017-02-10 Thread Marc Hartmayer
On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 08:17 PM +0100, Laine Stump wrote: > On 02/09/2017 09:21 AM, Marc Hartmayer wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 03:13 PM +0100, Marc Hartmayer >> wrote: >>> We have to allocate first and if, and only if, it was successful we

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 4/4] rpc: Fix potentially segfaults

2017-02-09 Thread Laine Stump
On 02/09/2017 09:13 AM, Marc Hartmayer wrote: We have to allocate first and if, and only if, it was successful we can set the count. A segfault has occurred in virNetServerServiceNewPostExecRestart() when VIR_ALLOC_N(svc->socks, n) has failed, but svc->nsocsk = n was already set. Thus

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 4/4] rpc: Fix potentially segfaults

2017-02-09 Thread Laine Stump
On 02/09/2017 09:21 AM, Marc Hartmayer wrote: On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 03:13 PM +0100, Marc Hartmayer wrote: We have to allocate first and if, and only if, it was successful we can set the count. A segfault has occurred in virNetServerServiceNewPostExecRestart()

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 4/4] rpc: Fix potentially segfaults

2017-02-09 Thread Marc Hartmayer
On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 03:13 PM +0100, Marc Hartmayer wrote: > We have to allocate first and if, and only if, it was successful we > can set the count. A segfault has occurred in > virNetServerServiceNewPostExecRestart() when VIR_ALLOC_N(svc->socks, > n) has failed,

[libvirt] [PATCH 4/4] rpc: Fix potentially segfaults

2017-02-09 Thread Marc Hartmayer
We have to allocate first and if, and only if, it was successful we can set the count. A segfault has occurred in virNetServerServiceNewPostExecRestart() when VIR_ALLOC_N(svc->socks, n) has failed, but svc->nsocsk = n was already set. Thus virObejectUnref(svc) was called and therefore it was