From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34444) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d3Afv-00058C-EO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 20:19:20 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d3Afs-0007do-Ap for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 20:19:19 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:33430) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d3Afs-0007db-4r for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 Apr 2017 20:19:16 -0400 Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2017 08:19:12 +0800 From: Fam Zheng Message-ID: <20170426001912.GA4275@lemon.lan> References: <20170411122632.14050-1-famz@redhat.com> <20170411122632.14050-11-famz@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL 10/11] block: Fix bdrv_co_flush early return List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: QEMU Developers On Tue, 04/25 16:00, Peter Maydell wrote: > > Coverity points out that there's a problem here -- we call > bdrv_inc_in_flight(bs), which assumes bs is not NULL, before > we do the test for whether bs is NULL. > > Presumably the NULL check needs to be pulled up earlier in > the function? > Yes, will take care of this one. Fam