From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:51520)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@gmail.com>) id 1TYYOG-0003PX-44
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2012 03:32:11 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@gmail.com>) id 1TYYOD-0001oL-1a
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2012 03:32:08 -0500
Received: from mail-ee0-f45.google.com ([74.125.83.45]:48874)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefanha@gmail.com>) id 1TYYOC-0001oC-RR
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2012 03:32:04 -0500
Received: by mail-ee0-f45.google.com with SMTP id d49so99854eek.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 14 Nov 2012 00:32:03 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 09:32:01 +0100
From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20121114083201.GA23826@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
References: <1352816095-14051-1-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com>
	<1352816095-14051-3-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1352816095-14051-3-git-send-email-kwolf@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] block: Avoid second open for format
 probing
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 03:14:55PM +0100, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> @@ -691,12 +685,15 @@ static int bdrv_open_common(BlockDriverState *bs, const char *filename,
>  
>      /* Open the image, either directly or using a protocol */
>      if (drv->bdrv_file_open) {
> +        if (file != NULL) {
> +            bdrv_swap(file, bs);
> +            bdrv_delete(file);
> +        }
>          ret = drv->bdrv_file_open(bs, filename, open_flags);
>      } else {
[...]
>      /* Open the image */
> -    ret = bdrv_open_common(bs, filename, flags, drv);
> +    ret = bdrv_open_common(bs, file, filename, flags, drv);
>      if (ret < 0) {
>          goto unlink_and_fail;
>      }
> @@ -894,6 +895,9 @@ int bdrv_open(BlockDriverState *bs, const char *filename, int flags,
>      return 0;
>  
>  unlink_and_fail:
> +    if (file != NULL) {
> +        bdrv_delete(file);
> +    }

Not sure I understand this code path.

We have a protocol (the driver implements .bdrv_file_open()) so we swap
file and bs, then delete old bs.  Then we call .bdrv_file_open() on the
already open file BDS.

Is it okay to call .bdrv_file_open() on an already open BDS?

Now if .bdrv_file_open() fails we will bdrv_delete() the already deleted
file BDS.  This is a double-free.

Stefan