I agree. Thanks, Ethan!
On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 01:13:00PM -0700, Justin Pettit wrote: > Nice catch. Thanks. > > --Justin > > > On Jun 7, 2012, at 1:08 PM, Ethan Jackson wrote: > > > In one edge case, ofoperation_complete() destroys its rule, without > > updating its ofoperation that the rule is gone. Later in the same > > function, ofoperation_destroy() attempts to modify the rule which > > already destroyed. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ethan Jackson <[email protected]> > > --- > > ofproto/ofproto.c | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/ofproto/ofproto.c b/ofproto/ofproto.c > > index 0c24314..eed0458 100644 > > --- a/ofproto/ofproto.c > > +++ b/ofproto/ofproto.c > > @@ -3617,6 +3617,7 @@ ofoperation_complete(struct ofoperation *op, enum > > ofperr error) > > } else { > > oftable_substitute_rule(rule, op->victim); > > ofproto_rule_destroy__(rule); > > + op->rule = NULL; > > } > > break; > > > > -- > > 1.7.10.2 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
