| Message ID | 20190910090310.14032-1-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | util/ioc.c: try to reassure Coverity about qemu_iovec_init_extended | expand |
On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 12:03:10PM +0300, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: > Make it more obvious, that filling qiov corresponds to qiov allocation, > which in turn corresponds to total_niov calculation, based on mid_niov > (not mid_len). Still add an assertion to show that there should be no > difference. > > Reported-by: Coverity (CID 1405302) > Suggested-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> > Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com> > --- > util/iov.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) Thanks, applied to my block-next tree: https://github.com/stefanha/qemu/commits/block-next Stefan
diff --git a/util/iov.c b/util/iov.c index 5059e10431..a4689ff3c9 100644 --- a/util/iov.c +++ b/util/iov.c @@ -446,7 +446,8 @@ void qemu_iovec_init_extended( p++; } - if (mid_len) { + assert(!mid_niov == !mid_len); + if (mid_niov) { memcpy(p, mid_iov, mid_niov * sizeof(*p)); p[0].iov_base = (uint8_t *)p[0].iov_base + mid_head; p[0].iov_len -= mid_head;
Make it more obvious, that filling qiov corresponds to qiov allocation, which in turn corresponds to total_niov calculation, based on mid_niov (not mid_len). Still add an assertion to show that there should be no difference. Reported-by: Coverity (CID 1405302) Suggested-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy <vsementsov@virtuozzo.com> --- util/iov.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)