[libvirt] [PATCH] remote_driver.c: fix a NULL dereference in remoteDomainEventQueueFlush().

[kakuma]

On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 02:39:58 +0100
Matthias Bolte <matthias.bolte at googlemail.com> wrote:

> 2010/1/12 kakuma <f-kak at ksh.biglobe.ne.jp>:
> > Hi, all.
> >
> > There is a case of a NULL dereference in function remoteDomainEventQueueFlush()
> > in remote_driver.c
> > In the case of local connection conn->privateData->domainEvents isn't reserved.
> > In this case it will occurs segment fault.
> > (for example examples/domain-events/events-c/event-test.c)
> > I think the following patch will be available.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > ---
> > ?src/remote/remote_driver.c | ? ?2 +-
> > ?1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/src/remote/remote_driver.c b/src/remote/remote_driver.c
> > index d6f5fce..b112fd3 100644
> > --- a/src/remote/remote_driver.c
> > +++ b/src/remote/remote_driver.c
> > @@ -8709,7 +8709,7 @@ void
> > ?remoteDomainEventQueueFlush(int timer ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED, void *opaque)
> > ?{
> > ? ? virConnectPtr conn = opaque;
> > - ? ?struct private_data *priv = conn->privateData;
> > + ? ?struct private_data *priv = conn->networkPrivateData;
> > ? ? virDomainEventQueue tempQueue;
> >
> > ? ? remoteDriverLock(priv);
> > --
> > 1.5.6.1
> >
> > --
> > kakuma <f-kak at ksh.biglobe.ne.jp>
> >
> 
> NACK.
> 
> Actually this is a workaround for the segfault. I prefer a proper fix.
> 
> I haven't understood yet how the event-test causes a segfault here,
> but the event-test code itself is broken for multiple added event
> handles. In contrast the Python event-test handles multiple added
> event handles properly and doesn't trigger this segfault.
> 
> Matthias

Thank you for your reply. OK. I will expect your fix.

Thanks.

-- 
kakuma <f-kak at ksh.biglobe.ne.jp>