From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cooper Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix NULL pointer dereference in ARINC653 free_vdata. Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 14:17:05 +0000 Message-ID: <5273B7E1.2000404@citrix.com> References: <1383252473-3067-1-git-send-email-nate.studer@dornerworks.com> <1383252473-3067-3-git-send-email-nate.studer@dornerworks.com> <5273B320.6070201@citrix.com> <5273B723.7090006@eu.citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5273B723.7090006@eu.citrix.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: George Dunlap Cc: smartin@milliways.cl, Nathan Studer , robert.vanvossen@dornerworks.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 01/11/13 14:13, George Dunlap wrote: > On 01/11/13 13:56, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> On 31/10/13 20:47, Nathan Studer wrote: >>> From: Nathan Studer >>> >>> The ARINC653 scheduler alloc_vdata function does not add the >>> idle cpu to its internal vcpu_list, but when the free_vdata >>> function is called, the scheduler attempted to remove the vcpu >>> from its internal vcpu_list, regardless of whether or not >>> the vcpu was the idle vcpu. Since the idle vcpu's list field >>> was never initialized, a NULL pointer was passed to list_del. >>> >>> When using cpupools, this resulted in a crash when moving a cpu >>> from an arinc653 scheduler pool. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Nathan Studer >> This again looks sane, but can't it logically be merged with the >> previous patch? Both of the patches are "dont break on >> {alloc,free}_vdata when using cpupools" >> >> I guess this is a matter of taste. > > I don't think it's worth asking for a whole re-spin just to merge two > relatively short commits that *could* be merged but also work separately. > > Both these patches can have my Ack, BTW (although I don't think they > need it): I just wanted to be a good citizen and do a bit of review. :-) > > -George > Fair point - the fixes are far more critical than the problems I nitpicked at. FWIW, Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper