Am 23.01.2020 um 21:38 schrieb John Snow <js...@redhat.com>:
>
>
>
>> On 1/23/20 12:05 PM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>> In iscsi_co_block_status(), we may have received num_descriptors == 0
>> from the iscsi server. Therefore, we can't unconditionally access
>> lbas->descriptors[0]. Add the missing check.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com>
>> ---
>> block/iscsi.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/block/iscsi.c b/block/iscsi.c
>> index cbd57294ab..c8feaa2f0e 100644
>> --- a/block/iscsi.c
>> +++ b/block/iscsi.c
>> @@ -753,7 +753,7 @@ retry:
>> }
>>
>> lbas = scsi_datain_unmarshall(iTask.task);
>> - if (lbas == NULL) {
>> + if (lbas == NULL || lbas->num_descriptors == 0) {
>> ret = -EIO;
>> goto out_unlock;
>> }
>>
>
> Naive question: Does the specification allow for such a response? Is
> this inherently an error?
The spec says the answer SHALL contain at least one lbasd. So I think threating
zero as an error is okay
Anyway,
Reviewed-by: Peter Lieven <p...@kamp.de>
Peter
