'ctx-fs_root' + 'path'/'fullname.data' may be larger than PATH_MAX, so
need use snprintf() instead of sprintf() just like another area have done in
9pfs.
Signed-off-by: Chen Gang gang.chen.5...@gmail.com
---
hw/9pfs/virtio-9p-local.c | 7 ---
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions
denied).
- Common test:
All are still OK after apply this path.
mkdir -p, create/open file/dir, modify file/dir, rm file/dir.
change various mount point paths under host and/or guest.
Signed-off-by: Chen Gang gang.chen.5...@gmail.com
---
hw/9pfs/cofs.c | 15
.
Next weekend should be fine. Happy hacking!
OK, thank you.
Thanks
--
Chen Gang
Open, share, and attitude like air, water, and life which God blessed
this path.
mkdir -p, create/open file/dir, modify file/dir, rm file/dir.
change various mount point paths under host and/or guest.
Signed-off-by: Chen Gang gang.chen.5...@gmail.com
---
hw/9pfs/cofs.c | 22 ++-
hw/9pfs/virtio-9p-handle.c | 25 ++-
hw/9pfs/virtio-9p
During the test, I found that if the path is long, the performance is
very very slow under 9pfs (whether apply this patch or not, the results
are the same).
So after this patch passes checking, I will/should analyse this
performance issue, next.
Thanks.
On 02/23/2014 12:48 PM, Chen Gang wrote
On 02/05/2014 07:44 AM, Chen Gang wrote:
On 02/05/2014 12:18 AM, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
That is a bug. The snprintf usage with PATH_MAX is to prevent buffer
overflow and not to truncate. I guess we should fix path handling
and propagate error correctly.
-aneesh
OK, thank you for your
On 02/03/2014 06:39 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
On 02/03/2014 06:34 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 06:00:42PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
We can not assume 'path' + 'ctx-fs_root' must be less than MAX_PATH,
so need use snprintf() instead of sprintf().
And also recommend to use
On 02/04/2014 07:06 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 07:02:18PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
On 02/03/2014 06:39 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
On 02/03/2014 06:34 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 06:00:42PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
We can not assume 'path' + 'ctx
features -- support 'unlimited' path internally.
before do it, better to get original authors' response firstly.
I guess, we need change quite a few areas and have a full test.
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
Open, share and attitude like air, water and life which God blessed
On 02/05/2014 12:18 AM, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
Chen Gang gang.chen.5...@gmail.com writes:
On 02/04/2014 07:06 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 07:02:18PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
On 02/03/2014 06:39 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
On 02/03/2014 06:34 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote
We can not assume 'path' + 'ctx-fs_root' must be less than MAX_PATH,
so need use snprintf() instead of sprintf().
And also recommend to use ARRAY_SIZE instead of hard code macro for an
array size in snprintf().
Signed-off-by: Chen Gang gang.chen.5...@gmail.com
---
hw/9pfs/virtio-9p-local.c | 9
On 02/03/2014 06:34 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 06:00:42PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
We can not assume 'path' + 'ctx-fs_root' must be less than MAX_PATH,
so need use snprintf() instead of sprintf().
And also recommend to use ARRAY_SIZE instead of hard code macro
Firstly, thank you very much for your reply, this is my first patch for
qemu. Next year (2014), as a volunteer, I will try to make a patch for
qemu in each month. :-)
On 12/29/2013 07:43 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 28 December 2013 08:52, Chen Gang gang.chen.5...@gmail.com wrote:
For valid
For valid 'fd' (in most cases), it is enough to only check whether it
is larger than STDERR_FILENO, so recommend to move if (fd 0) into
failure processing block.
Signed-off-by: Chen Gang gang.chen.5...@gmail.com
---
vl.c | 9 ++---
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git
601 - 614 of 614 matches
Mail list logo
