Re: [PATCH 0/8] Coverity fixes for vchan-socket-proxy

[Jason Andryuk <jandryuk@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 8:40 AM Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
<marmarek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 10:59:55PM -0400, Jason Andryuk wrote:
> > On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 6:36 PM Jason Andryuk <jandryuk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 10:50 PM Jason Andryuk <jandryuk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This series addresses some Coverity reports.  To handle closing FDs, a
> > > > state struct is introduced to track FDs closed in both main() and
> > > > data_loop().
> > >
> > > I've realized the changes here are insufficient to handle the FD
> > > leaks.  That is, the accept()-ed FDs need to be closed inside the for
> > > loop so they aren't leaked with each iteration.  I'll re-work for a
> > > v2.
> >
> > So it turns out this series doesn't leak FDs in the for loop.  FDs are
> > necessarily closed down in data_loop() when the read() returns 0.  The
> > only returns from data_loop() are after the FDs have been closed.
> > data_loop() and some of the functions it calls will call exit(1) on
> > error, but that won't leak FDs.
> >
> > Please review this series.  Sorry for the confusion.
>
> For the whole series:
>
> Reviewed-by: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks for the review.  Sorry for forgetting to CC you on this series
and the v2 posted on Jun 10th as well.  For v2, patch 1 now also
changes strncpy to strcpy to avoid a gcc-10 warning reported by Olaf
Hering.  Patches 2 & 3 are new to move some perror calls.  v1 patches
2-8 shifted to 4-10 in v2, but are unchanged.

Thanks,
Jason