[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] eal: fix not checking unlock result

Burakov, Anatoly anatoly.burakov at intel.com
Wed Apr 25 10:53:15 CEST 2018


On 25-Apr-18 8:09 AM, Tan, Jianfeng wrote:
> 
> 
> On 4/17/2018 11:42 PM, Anatoly Burakov wrote:
>> Coverity issue: 272607
>>
>> Fixes: 66cc45e293ed ("mem: replace memseg with memseg lists")
>> Cc: anatoly.burakov at intel.com
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.burakov at intel.com>
>> ---
>>   lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_hugepage_info.c | 7 +++++--
>>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_hugepage_info.c 
>> b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_hugepage_info.c
>> index 009f963..01fee51 100644
>> --- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_hugepage_info.c
>> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/eal_hugepage_info.c
>> @@ -304,8 +304,11 @@ clear_hugedir(const char * hugedir)
>>           /* if lock succeeds, unlock and remove the file */
>>           if (lck_result != -1) {
>>               lck.l_type = F_UNLCK;
>> -            fcntl(fd, F_SETLK, &lck);
>> -            unlinkat(dir_fd, dirent->d_name, 0);
>> +            if (fcntl(fd, F_SETLK, &lck) < 0)
>> +                RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, "Couldn't unlock %s: %s\n",
>> +                    dirent->d_name, strerror(errno));
> 
> It seems that we shall return error if this nearly-impossible error 
> happens, no?

I'm not sure if we should. In any case, lock will be dropped by close(), 
so the proper fix would've been just remove the fcntl() call altogether.

I'll respin.

> 
>> +            else
>> +                unlinkat(dir_fd, dirent->d_name, 0);
>>           }
>>           close (fd);
>>           dirent = readdir(dir);
> 
> 


-- 
Thanks,
Anatoly


More information about the dev mailing list