Am 13.06.2017 um 18:12 hat Peter Maydell geschrieben: > On 7 June 2017 at 18:50, Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> wrote: > > diff --git a/block/commit.c b/block/commit.c > > index a3028b2..af6fa68 100644 > > --- a/block/commit.c > > +++ b/block/commit.c > > @@ -89,6 +89,10 @@ static void commit_complete(BlockJob *job, void *opaque) > > int ret = data->ret; > > bool remove_commit_top_bs = false; > > > > + /* Make sure overlay_bs and top stay around until > > bdrv_set_backing_hd() */ > > + bdrv_ref(top); > > + bdrv_ref(overlay_bs); > > + > > /* Remove base node parent that still uses BLK_PERM_WRITE/RESIZE before > > * the normal backing chain can be restored. */ > > blk_unref(s->base); > > Hi -- coverity complains about this change, because bdrv_ref() > assumes that its argument is not NULL, but later on in commit_complete() > we have a check > "if (overlay_bs && ...)" > which assumes its argument might be NULL. (CID 1376205) > > Which is correct?
I saw the Coverity report and am looking into it. It's not completely clear to me yet which is correct, but I suspect it can be NULL. Kevin
