On Thursday 17 February 2011 4:19:17 pm Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:23 PM, M. Mohan Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
> > + switch (type) {
> > + case T_MKNOD:
> > + request.data.type = T_MKNOD;
> > + break;
> > + case T_MKDIR:
> > + request.data.type = T_MKDIR;
> > + break;
> > + case T_SYMLINK:
> > + request.data.type = T_SYMLINK;
> > + break;
> > + case T_LINK:
> > + request.data.type = T_LINK;
> > + break;
> > + }
>
> Or just request.data.type = type?
>
Oops, I will modify.
> > + if (oldpath) {
> > + request.data.oldpath_len = strlen(oldpath);
> > + strcpy(request.path.old_path, oldpath);
>
> It's not obvious that this strcpy() is safe.
>
I will change the code.
> > + }
> > + retval = v9fs_create_special(fs_ctx, &request, &error);
> > + if (retval < 0) {
> > + errno = error;
> > + return 0;
>
> This looks suspicious. Should the return value be negative on error?
Yes, it should return negative on error, I will update.
>
> > + char *tmp = qemu_strdup(rpath(fs_ctx, oldpath));
> > + if (tmp == NULL) {
>
> QEMU strdup never returns NULL.
Ok.
>
> Stefan
----
M. Mohan Kumar
