| Message ID | 20171108225340.10194-1-lepton@google.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Hi,
This series seems to have some coding style problems. See output below for
more information:
Subject: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] slirp: don't zero ti_i since we access it later.
Type: series
Message-id: 20171108225340.10194-1-lepton@google.com
=== TEST SCRIPT BEGIN ===
#!/bin/bash
BASE=base
n=1
total=$(git log --oneline $BASE.. | wc -l)
failed=0
git config --local diff.renamelimit 0
git config --local diff.renames True
commits="$(git log --format=%H --reverse $BASE..)"
for c in $commits; do
echo "Checking PATCH $n/$total: $(git log -n 1 --format=%s $c)..."
if ! git show $c --format=email | ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --mailback -; then
failed=1
echo
fi
n=$((n+1))
done
exit $failed
=== TEST SCRIPT END ===
Updating 3c8cf5a9c21ff8782164d1def7f44bd888713384
From https://github.com/patchew-project/qemu
* [new tag] patchew/20171108225340.10194-1-lepton@google.com -> patchew/20171108225340.10194-1-lepton@google.com
Switched to a new branch 'test'
566ba17a0b slirp: don't zero ti_i since we access it later.
=== OUTPUT BEGIN ===
Checking PATCH 1/1: slirp: don't zero ti_i since we access it later....
ERROR: code indent should never use tabs
#21: FILE: slirp/tcp_subr.c:151:
+^I^Iswitch (af) {$
ERROR: code indent should never use tabs
#22: FILE: slirp/tcp_subr.c:152:
+^I^Icase AF_INET:$
ERROR: code indent should never use tabs
#23: FILE: slirp/tcp_subr.c:153:
+^I^I ti->ti.ti_i4.ih_x1 = 0;$
ERROR: code indent should never use tabs
#24: FILE: slirp/tcp_subr.c:154:
+^I^I break;$
ERROR: code indent should never use tabs
#25: FILE: slirp/tcp_subr.c:155:
+^I^Icase AF_INET6:$
ERROR: code indent should never use tabs
#26: FILE: slirp/tcp_subr.c:156:
+^I^I ti->ti.ti_i6.ih_x1 = 0;$
ERROR: code indent should never use tabs
#27: FILE: slirp/tcp_subr.c:157:
+^I^I break;$
ERROR: code indent should never use tabs
#28: FILE: slirp/tcp_subr.c:158:
+^I^Idefault:$
ERROR: code indent should never use tabs
#29: FILE: slirp/tcp_subr.c:159:
+^I^I g_assert_not_reached();$
ERROR: code indent should never use tabs
#30: FILE: slirp/tcp_subr.c:160:
+^I^I}$
total: 10 errors, 0 warnings, 17 lines checked
Your patch has style problems, please review. If any of these errors
are false positives report them to the maintainer, see
CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS.
=== OUTPUT END ===
Test command exited with code: 1
---
Email generated automatically by Patchew [http://patchew.org/].
Please send your feedback to patchew-devel@freelists.org
Hi Adding Guillaume in CC, who wrote that line in commit 98c63057d2144 On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 11:53 PM, Tao Wu via Qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org> wrote: > The current code looks buggy, we zero ti_i while we access > ti_dst/ti_src later. Could you described the symptoms and why you fixed it that way? thanks > > Signed-off-by: Tao Wu <lepton@google.com> > --- > slirp/tcp_subr.c | 11 ++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/slirp/tcp_subr.c b/slirp/tcp_subr.c > index dc8b4bbb50..da0d53743f 100644 > --- a/slirp/tcp_subr.c > +++ b/slirp/tcp_subr.c > @@ -148,7 +148,16 @@ tcp_respond(struct tcpcb *tp, struct tcpiphdr *ti, struct mbuf *m, > m->m_data += IF_MAXLINKHDR; > *mtod(m, struct tcpiphdr *) = *ti; > ti = mtod(m, struct tcpiphdr *); > - memset(&ti->ti, 0, sizeof(ti->ti)); > + switch (af) { > + case AF_INET: > + ti->ti.ti_i4.ih_x1 = 0; > + break; > + case AF_INET6: > + ti->ti.ti_i6.ih_x1 = 0; > + break; > + default: > + g_assert_not_reached(); > + } > flags = TH_ACK; > } else { > /* > -- > 2.15.0.448.gf294e3d99a-goog > >
Hello, Tao Wu, on mer. 08 nov. 2017 14:53:40 -0800, wrote: > The current code looks buggy, we zero ti_i while we access > ti_dst/ti_src later. Mmm, indeed, looking again at how it was introduced, it was too much. Samuel
Thanks. Actually this is a follow up with my previous effort to fix this bug. I was busy on something else and then got lost in that old thread. Now I just checked some my local patch to see if they've merged to upstream and then found it out. This is old thread about this: http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2017-04/msg05544.html On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 2:50 AM, Marc-André Lureau < marcandre.lureau@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi > > Adding Guillaume in CC, who wrote that line in commit 98c63057d2144 > > On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 11:53 PM, Tao Wu via Qemu-devel > <qemu-devel@nongnu.org> wrote: > > The current code looks buggy, we zero ti_i while we access > > ti_dst/ti_src later. > > Could you described the symptoms and why you fixed it that way? > > thanks > > > > > Signed-off-by: Tao Wu <lepton@google.com> > > --- > > slirp/tcp_subr.c | 11 ++++++++++- > > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/slirp/tcp_subr.c b/slirp/tcp_subr.c > > index dc8b4bbb50..da0d53743f 100644 > > --- a/slirp/tcp_subr.c > > +++ b/slirp/tcp_subr.c > > @@ -148,7 +148,16 @@ tcp_respond(struct tcpcb *tp, struct tcpiphdr *ti, > struct mbuf *m, > > m->m_data += IF_MAXLINKHDR; > > *mtod(m, struct tcpiphdr *) = *ti; > > ti = mtod(m, struct tcpiphdr *); > > - memset(&ti->ti, 0, sizeof(ti->ti)); > > + switch (af) { > > + case AF_INET: > > + ti->ti.ti_i4.ih_x1 = 0; > > + break; > > + case AF_INET6: > > + ti->ti.ti_i6.ih_x1 = 0; > > + break; > > + default: > > + g_assert_not_reached(); > > + } > > flags = TH_ACK; > > } else { > > /* > > -- > > 2.15.0.448.gf294e3d99a-goog > > > > > > > > -- > Marc-André Lureau >
Tao Wu(吴涛@Eng), on jeu. 09 nov. 2017 10:48:27 -0800, wrote: > Thanks. Actually this is a follow up with my previous effort to fix this bug. > I was busy on something else and then got lost in that old thread. Now I just > checked some my local patch > to see if they've merged to upstream and then found it out. > > This is old thread about this: > [1]http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2017-04/msg05544.html I knew I had seen that proposal somewhere before :) Thanks for the patch, Samuel
diff --git a/slirp/tcp_subr.c b/slirp/tcp_subr.c index dc8b4bbb50..da0d53743f 100644 --- a/slirp/tcp_subr.c +++ b/slirp/tcp_subr.c @@ -148,7 +148,16 @@ tcp_respond(struct tcpcb *tp, struct tcpiphdr *ti, struct mbuf *m, m->m_data += IF_MAXLINKHDR; *mtod(m, struct tcpiphdr *) = *ti; ti = mtod(m, struct tcpiphdr *); - memset(&ti->ti, 0, sizeof(ti->ti)); + switch (af) { + case AF_INET: + ti->ti.ti_i4.ih_x1 = 0; + break; + case AF_INET6: + ti->ti.ti_i6.ih_x1 = 0; + break; + default: + g_assert_not_reached(); + } flags = TH_ACK; } else { /*
The current code looks buggy, we zero ti_i while we access ti_dst/ti_src later. Signed-off-by: Tao Wu <lepton@google.com> --- slirp/tcp_subr.c | 11 ++++++++++- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)