[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