On 17/11/09 17:07, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> From 3c5d63be17d281634f036f53aa32103ad4ab1c41 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
2001
From: Richard Jones<rjones(a)redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 17:02:45 +0000
Subject: [PATCH 4/5] fuse: Fix read for empty files.
Error handling for the guestfs_pread call was incorrect, which
meant that empty files could produce spurious error messages.
---
fuse/guestmount.c | 8 +++++++-
1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fuse/guestmount.c b/fuse/guestmount.c
index 9d16cef..669bf80 100644
--- a/fuse/guestmount.c
+++ b/fuse/guestmount.c
@@ -621,8 +621,14 @@ fg_read (const char *path, char *buf, size_t size, off_t offset,
if (size> limit)
size = limit;
+ /* Note the correct error handling here is tricky, because in the
+ * case where the call returns a zero-length buffer, it might return
+ * NULL. However it won't adjust rsize along the error path, so we
+ * can set rsize to something beforehand and use that as a flag.
+ */
+ rsize = 1;
r = guestfs_pread (g, path, size, offset,&rsize);
- if (r == NULL)
+ if (rsize == 1&& r == NULL)
return error ();
/* This should never happen, but at least it stops us overflowing
-- 1.6.5.2
I've stared at this til my head hurts, and I don't get it. Why is 1 not
a valid returned size from guestfs_pread? Why is NULL not an indicator
of failure?
The documentation says:
This function returns a buffer, or NULL on error. The size of the
returned buffer is written to *size_r. The caller must free the
returned buffer after use.
If NULL isn't sufficient to indicate error, guestfs_pread needs to be
fixed, not this funtion.
Matt
--
Matthew Booth, RHCA, RHCSS
Red Hat Engineering, Virtualisation Team
M: +44 (0)7977 267231
GPG ID: D33C3490
GPG FPR: 3733 612D 2D05 5458 8A8A 1600 3441 EA19 D33C 3490