From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:45617) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T8QbN-0005HR-49 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2012 02:57:41 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T8QbM-0000Ku-38 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2012 02:57:41 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:53199) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T8QbL-0000Kj-R9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2012 02:57:40 -0400 Message-ID: <504454E0.4000606@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2012 08:57:36 +0200 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1346484639-15141-1-git-send-email-sw@weilnetz.de> In-Reply-To: <1346484639-15141-1-git-send-email-sw@weilnetz.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qapi: Fix potential NULL pointer segfault List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Stefan Weil Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Il 01/09/2012 09:30, Stefan Weil ha scritto: > Report from smatch: > > qapi-visit.c:1640 visit_type_BlockdevAction(8) error: > we previously assumed 'obj' could be null (see line 1639) > qapi-visit.c:2432 visit_type_NetClientOptions(8) error: > we previously assumed 'obj' could be null (see line 2431) > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Weil > --- > scripts/qapi-visit.py | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/scripts/qapi-visit.py b/scripts/qapi-visit.py > index 2afc5c0..1a669f3 100644 > --- a/scripts/qapi-visit.py > +++ b/scripts/qapi-visit.py > @@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ void visit_type_%(name)s(Visitor *m, %(name)s ** obj, const char *name, Error ** > if (!error_is_set(errp)) { > visit_start_struct(m, (void **)obj, "%(name)s", name, sizeof(%(name)s), &err); > if (!err) { > - if (!obj || *obj) { > + if (obj && *obj) { > visit_type_%(name)sKind(m, &(*obj)->kind, "type", &err); > if (!err) { > switch ((*obj)->kind) { > Reviewed-by: Paolo Bonzini Paolo