Eric Blake writes:
> Coverity warns that we store the address of a stack variable through a
> pointer passed in by the caller, which would let the caller trivially
> trigger use-after-free if that stored value is still present when we
> finish execution. However, the way coroutines work is tha
On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 at 10:08, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy
wrote:
>
> 11.11.2019 23:35, Eric Blake wrote:
> > Coverity warns that we store the address of a stack variable through a
> > pointer passed in by the caller, which would let the caller trivially
> > trigger use-after-free if that stored v
11.11.2019 23:35, Eric Blake wrote:
> Coverity warns that we store the address of a stack variable through a
> pointer passed in by the caller, which would let the caller trivially
> trigger use-after-free if that stored value is still present when we
> finish execution. However, the way coroutine
On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 at 20:35, Eric Blake wrote:
>
> Coverity warns that we store the address of a stack variable through a
> pointer passed in by the caller, which would let the caller trivially
> trigger use-after-free if that stored value is still present when we
> finish execution. However, th
Coverity warns that we store the address of a stack variable through a
pointer passed in by the caller, which would let the caller trivially
trigger use-after-free if that stored value is still present when we
finish execution. However, the way coroutines work is that after our
call to qemu_corout
