On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 04:41:31PM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 10:30:13AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 02:36:43PM +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > This filter doesn't call the next_open function in the non-TLS case, > > > and therefore it never opens the plugin. This leaves the internal > > > state of nbdkit a bit strange. There is no plugin context allocated, > > > and the last filter in the chain has a context c_next pointer of NULL. > > > > > > This works, provided we intercept every possible callback, check the > > > non-TLS case, and prevent it from calling the next function (because > > > it would dereference the NULL c_next). > > > > > > To avoid a crash in backend_block_size we must therefore provide a > > > .block_size callback in this filter. > > > --- > > > filters/tls-fallback/tls-fallback.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) > > > > ACK. > > > > Would you like to squash this in, and/or have me commit this separately? > > I was actually thinking about squashing my patches 1-4 together. > They're all really the same change, but I kept them separate for ease > of review. What do you think?
Seems reasonable (I'll confirm it again when I get through reviewing 4). > > But I think this patch: > > > commit 8c00ca2fe418aeecf0818feed227a72e76d87f18 > > Author: Eric Blake <[email protected]> > > Date: Thu Feb 17 10:24:50 2022 -0600 > > > > tls-fallback: Enhance comments about required callbacks > ... would stay separate, and you can push it before or after. Before - it is now commit 8c00ca2f ;) -- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org _______________________________________________ Libguestfs mailing list [email protected] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libguestfs
