From nobody Thu May 15 09:49:49 2025 Delivered-To: importer@patchew.org Received-SPF: pass (zoho.com: domain of redhat.com designates 209.132.183.28 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.183.28; envelope-from=libvir-list-bounces@redhat.com; helo=mx1.redhat.com; Authentication-Results: mx.zohomail.com; spf=pass (zoho.com: domain of redhat.com designates 209.132.183.28 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=libvir-list-bounces@redhat.com Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1511372159109892.4600409674716; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 09:35:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F175356F0; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 17:35:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (colo-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.21]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64E385D960; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 17:35:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.19.33]) by colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBED64BB79; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 17:35:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) by lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id vAMHZsta009589 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 12:35:54 -0500 Received: by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) id A8A095C88F; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 17:35:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from moe.brq.redhat.com (unknown [10.43.2.192]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FD7E5C552 for ; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 17:35:54 +0000 (UTC) From: Michal Privoznik To: libvir-list@redhat.com Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 18:35:45 +0100 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: In-Reply-To: References: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 X-loop: libvir-list@redhat.com Subject: [libvirt] [PATCH v2 1/5] virDomainNumaGetNodeDistance: Fix input arguments validation X-BeenThere: libvir-list@redhat.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: junk List-Id: Development discussions about the libvirt library & tools List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: libvir-list-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: libvir-list-bounces@redhat.com X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.30]); Wed, 22 Nov 2017 17:35:58 +0000 (UTC) X-ZohoMail: RSF_0 Z_629925259 SPT_0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" There's no point in checking if numa->mem_nodes[node].ndistances is set if we check for numa->mem_nodes[node].distances. However, it makes sense to check if the sibling node (@cellid) caller passed falls within boundaries. Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik --- src/conf/numa_conf.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/conf/numa_conf.c b/src/conf/numa_conf.c index 7bba4120b..c2f0d1ca8 100644 --- a/src/conf/numa_conf.c +++ b/src/conf/numa_conf.c @@ -1153,8 +1153,8 @@ virDomainNumaGetNodeDistance(virDomainNumaPtr numa, * defined default for local and remote nodes. */ if (!distances || - !distances[cellid].value || - !numa->mem_nodes[node].ndistances) + cellid >=3D numa->nmem_nodes || + !distances[cellid].value) return (node =3D=3D cellid) ? LOCAL_DISTANCE : REMOTE_DISTANCE; =20 return distances[cellid].value; --=20 2.13.6 -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list