Coverity points out (CID 1400442) that in this code:
if (packet->pages_alloc > p->pages->allocated) {
multifd_pages_clear(p->pages);
multifd_pages_init(packet->pages_alloc);
}
we free p->pages in multifd_pages_clear() but continue to
use it in the following code. We also leak memory, because
multifd_pages_init() returns the pointer to a new MultiFDPages_t
struct but we are ignoring its return value.
Fix both of these bugs by adding the missing assignment of
the newly created struct to p->pages.
Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org>
---
I don't know anything about the multifd code, but this seems like
the obvious fix based on looking at what the clear and init
functions are doing. I have only run 'make check' on this,
so review and testing definitely in order. I think we should
really put this into 4.0, which means ideally I'd like to
commit it to master today or tomorrow, though...
---
migration/ram.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/migration/ram.c b/migration/ram.c
index f68beeeeffc..1ca9ba77b6a 100644
--- a/migration/ram.c
+++ b/migration/ram.c
@@ -851,7 +851,7 @@ static int multifd_recv_unfill_packet(MultiFDRecvParams *p,
Error **errp)
*/
if (packet->pages_alloc > p->pages->allocated) {
multifd_pages_clear(p->pages);
- multifd_pages_init(packet->pages_alloc);
+ p->pages = multifd_pages_init(packet->pages_alloc);
}
p->pages->used = be32_to_cpu(packet->pages_used);
--
2.20.1
