From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35295) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cDo0k-0007vv-N7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2016 02:48:31 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cDo0h-0001Bv-Ls for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2016 02:48:30 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:51504) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cDo0h-0001BT-Fo for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2016 02:48:27 -0500 References: <1480678088-21464-1-git-send-email-ppandit@redhat.com> From: Jason Wang Message-ID: Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 15:48:22 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1480678088-21464-1-git-send-email-ppandit@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] net: virtio-net: initialise local 'netcfg' variable List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: P J P , Qemu Developers Cc: Azureyang , Prasad J Pandit On 2016=E5=B9=B412=E6=9C=8802=E6=97=A5 19:28, P J P wrote: > From: Prasad J Pandit > > Local 'netcfg' variable in 'virtio_net_get_config' routine was > not initialised. It could leak uninitialised 'netcfg.mtu' field > memory. Initialise 'netcfg' to avoid it. > > Reported-by: Azureyang > Signed-off-by: Prasad J Pandit > --- > hw/net/virtio-net.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/hw/net/virtio-net.c b/hw/net/virtio-net.c > index 01f1351..cb5b3dc 100644 > --- a/hw/net/virtio-net.c > +++ b/hw/net/virtio-net.c > @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ static int vq2q(int queue_index) > static void virtio_net_get_config(VirtIODevice *vdev, uint8_t *config= ) > { > VirtIONet *n =3D VIRTIO_NET(vdev); > - struct virtio_net_config netcfg; > + struct virtio_net_config netcfg =3D {}; > =20 > virtio_stw_p(vdev, &netcfg.status, n->status); > virtio_stw_p(vdev, &netcfg.max_virtqueue_pairs, n->max_queues); Good catch but since mtu patch wasn't accepted so mtu were in fact not=20 exposed to guest. (FYI, you can have a look at Maxime patch, he did a stw_p here()). Thanks