From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:47450) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1guLss-0004Wt-R0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 13:37:19 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1guLsr-0000Yn-N6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 13:37:18 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:33618) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1guLsr-0000YW-HE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 13:37:17 -0500 Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 18:37:09 +0000 From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Message-ID: <20190214183708.GG2617@work-vm> References: <20190122173111.29821-1-dgilbert@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] migration/rdma: unegister fd handler List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: QEMU Developers , jemmy858585@gmail.com, Juan Quintela , Peter Xu * Peter Maydell (peter.maydell@linaro.org) wrote: > On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 at 19:08, Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git) > wrote: > > > > From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" > > > > Unregister the fd handler before we destroy the channel, > > otherwise we've got a race where we might land in the > > fd handler just as we're closing the device. > > > > (The race is quite data dependent, you just have to have > > the right set of devices for it to trigger). > > > > Corresponds to RH bz: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1666601 > > > > Signed-off-by: Dr. David Alan Gilbert > > --- > > migration/rdma.c | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/migration/rdma.c b/migration/rdma.c > > index 9b2e7e10aa..54a3c11540 100644 > > --- a/migration/rdma.c > > +++ b/migration/rdma.c > > @@ -2321,6 +2321,7 @@ static void qemu_rdma_cleanup(RDMAContext *rdma) > > rdma->connected = false; > > } > > > > + qemu_set_fd_handler(rdma->channel->fd, NULL, NULL, NULL); > > g_free(rdma->dest_blocks); > > rdma->dest_blocks = NULL; > > Hi -- this patch makes coverity complain (CID 1398634), > because here we use rdma->channel without checking that it is NULL, > but later in the function we have an "if (rdma->channel)" test. > Should this code be conditional on rmda->channel being non-NULL, > or is the later test incorrect? Yes, it's got a point - I can seg that. I'll post a fix. Dave > thanks > -- PMM -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK