On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 at 09:15, Jason Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> From: Alexey Kirillov <[email protected]>
>
> The query-netdev command is used to get the configuration of the current
> network device backends (netdevs).
> This is the QMP analog of the HMP command "info network" but only for
> netdevs (i.e. excluding NIC and hubports).
>
> The query-netdev command returns an array of objects of the NetdevInfo
> type, which are an extension of Netdev type. It means that response can
> be used for netdev-add after small modification. This can be useful for
> recreate the same netdev configuration.
>
> Information about the network device is filled in when it is created or
> modified and is available through the NetClientState->stored_config.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kirillov <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Markus Armbruster <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <[email protected]>
Hi; Coverity is doubtful (CID 1450841) about this code:
> @@ -668,12 +686,65 @@ static void net_init_tap_one(const NetdevTapOptions
> *tap, NetClientState *peer,
> + if (!stored->has_fds) {
> + stored->has_fds = true;
> + stored->fds = g_strdup_printf("%d", fd);
> + } else {
> + char *tmp_s = stored->fds;
> + stored->fds = g_strdup_printf("%s:%d", stored->fds, fd);
> + g_free(tmp_s);
> + }
Here we have a bit of code which maintains stored->fds as a
colon-separated string of integers, by tacking the new fd onto
the end of the old string if it's already present.
> @@ -731,6 +813,15 @@ static void net_init_tap_one(const NetdevTapOptions
> *tap, NetClientState *peer,
> }
> options.opaque = (void *)(uintptr_t)vhostfd;
>
> + if (!stored->has_vhostfds) {
> + stored->has_vhostfds = true;
> + stored->vhostfds = g_strdup_printf("%d", vhostfd);
> + } else {
> + char *tmp_s = stored->vhostfds;
> + stored->vhostfds = g_strdup_printf("%s:%d", stored->fds,
> vhostfd);
> + g_free(tmp_s);
> + }
Here we have a bit of code that's kind of similar, except that
the first argument to g_strdup_printf() is 'stored->fds', not
'stored->vhostfds'.
Coverity suspects cut-n-paste error -- is it right ?
thanks
-- PMM
