From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@suse.de>
Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it, Steve Dickson <steved@redhat.com>,
libtirpc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
Hongchen Zhang <zhanghongchen@loongson.cn>
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2] rpc01: fix variable not initialized
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 10:50:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y0UuVudx0DRmjNjR@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87sfju9262.fsf@suse.de>
> Hello,
> Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz> writes:
> > Hi Richie,
> >> Hello,
> >> Looks OK to me, Petr?
> >> Acked-by: Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@suse.com>
> > I replied at ML at v1 [1] with a question to use rc for verification.
> > I'm not sure whether it was me who marked the question as superseded.
> Probably me.
> > @Hongchen you sent v1 twice, v2 twice. Duplicate send without your reply does
> > not speedup things. Please next time reply with ping (but if you don't reply to
> > the question, ball is on your side).
> I'll mark this as changes requested.
> TBH I think the test needs rewriting in the new API in pure C. So this
> is likely to be wasted effort.
+1
@Hongchen are you trying to fix actual problem or just some static analyzer
suggested that variable can be uninitialized?
Kind regards,
Petr
> > Kind regards,
> > Petr
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/Ysu+mbkO8eUP4A2+@pevik/
> > [2] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/ltp/list/?submitter=84160&state=*
> >> Hongchen Zhang <zhanghongchen@loongson.cn> writes:
> >> > when error occurred in function callrpc/clnt_call, return_buffer may
> >> > be leaved not initialized.
> >> > As Petr said, we should check the return value before retrieve the
> >> > return_buffer->data. Change do_compare's parameter from char * to
> >> > struct data * to fix it.
> >> > Signed-off-by: Hongchen Zhang <zhanghongchen@loongson.cn>
> >> > ---
> >> > testcases/network/rpc/basic_tests/rpc01/rpc1.c | 14 ++++++++------
> >> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >> > diff --git a/testcases/network/rpc/basic_tests/rpc01/rpc1.c b/testcases/network/rpc/basic_tests/rpc01/rpc1.c
> >> > index bc9f35b..6b8619d 100644
> >> > --- a/testcases/network/rpc/basic_tests/rpc01/rpc1.c
> >> > +++ b/testcases/network/rpc/basic_tests/rpc01/rpc1.c
> >> > @@ -18,7 +18,8 @@ char *file_name = NULL;
> >> > char host_name[100];
> >> > long host_address;
> >> > -void do_compare(int, char *, struct data *, char *);
> >> > +void do_compare(int rpc_rc, char *msg, struct data *buffer,
> >> > + struct data *ret_buffer)
> >> > void usage_error(char *program_name);
> >> > int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> >> > @@ -128,7 +129,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> >> > rc = callrpc(server, program, version, 1, (xdrproc_t)xdr_send_data,
> >> > (char *)&buffer, (xdrproc_t)xdr_receive_data,
> >> > (char *)&return_buffer);
> >> > - do_compare(rc, "callrpc", &buffer, return_buffer->data);
> >> > + do_compare(rc, "callrpc", &buffer, return_buffer);
> >> > server_sin.sin_port = 0;
> >> > sock = RPC_ANYSOCK;
> >> > @@ -145,7 +146,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> >> > (char *)&buffer, (xdrproc_t)xdr_receive_data,
> >> > (char *)&return_buffer, timeout);
> >> > clnt_destroy(clnt);
> >> > - do_compare(rc, "udp transport", &buffer, return_buffer->data);
> >> > + do_compare(rc, "udp transport", &buffer, return_buffer);
> >> > server_sin.sin_port = 0;
> >> > sock = RPC_ANYSOCK;
> >> > @@ -160,12 +161,13 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> >> > (char *)&buffer, (xdrproc_t)xdr_receive_data,
> >> > (char *)&return_buffer, timeout);
> >> > clnt_destroy(clnt);
> >> > - do_compare(rc, "tcp transport", &buffer, return_buffer->data);
> >> > + do_compare(rc, "tcp transport", &buffer, return_buffer);
> >> > exit(0);
> >> > }
> >> > -void do_compare(int rpc_rc, char *msg, struct data *buffer, char *ret_data)
> >> > +void do_compare(int rpc_rc, char *msg, struct data *buffer,
> >> > + struct data *ret_buffer)
> >> > {
> >> > int rc;
> >> > @@ -175,7 +177,7 @@ void do_compare(int rpc_rc, char *msg, struct data *buffer, char *ret_data)
> >> > printf("\n");
> >> > exit(1);
> >> > }
> >> > - rc = memcmp(buffer->data, ret_data, buffer->data_length);
> >> > + rc = memcmp(buffer->data, ret_buffer->data, buffer->data_length);
> >> > if (rc) {
> >> > printf("Data compare for %s returned %d\n", msg, rc);
> >> > exit(1);
> >> > --
> >> > 1.8.3.1
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-11 8:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-04 12:17 [LTP] [PATCH] rpc01: fix variable not initialized Hongchen Zhang
2022-07-11 6:09 ` Petr Vorel
2022-07-12 6:43 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2] " Hongchen Zhang
2022-10-10 13:23 ` Richard Palethorpe
2022-10-10 14:40 ` Petr Vorel
2022-10-11 8:36 ` Richard Palethorpe
2022-10-11 8:50 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2022-07-12 6:46 ` Hongchen Zhang
2022-07-12 7:01 ` [LTP] [PATCH] " Hongchen Zhang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Y0UuVudx0DRmjNjR@pevik \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=libtirpc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
--cc=rpalethorpe@suse.de \
--cc=steved@redhat.com \
--cc=zhanghongchen@loongson.cn \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox