Wei Liu writes ("[PATCH for-4.10] libxl: handle NULL in
libxl__enum_from_string"):
> Discovered by Coverity.
But. Surely it is very wrong
> @@ -1017,7 +1017,7 @@ int libxl_get_max_nodes(libxl_ctx *ctx)
> int libxl__enum_from_string(const libxl_enum_string_table *t,
> const char *s, int *e)
> {
> - if (!t) return ERROR_INVAL;
> + if (!t || !s) return ERROR_INVAL;
to call this function with s==NULL.
I'm not generally in favour of turning such mistakes from
easy-to-debug crashes into hard-to-track-down error codes (especially
with our nonspecific error codes).
Where does that occur ?
Ian.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
