Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 17:34:58 -0700 From: Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> To: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>, Kristof Provost <kp@FreeBSD.org> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r328313 - head/sys/netpfil/pf Message-ID: <1516840498.42536.213.camel@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20180125001310.GJ8113@FreeBSD.org> References: <201801240429.w0O4THIl059440@repo.freebsd.org> <20180125001310.GJ8113@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 2018-01-24 at 16:13 -0800, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > Hi Kristof, > > On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 04:29:17AM +0000, Kristof Provost wrote: > K> Author: kp > K> Date: Wed Jan 24 04:29:16 2018 > K> New Revision: 328313 > K> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/328313 > K> > K> Log: > K> pf: States have at least two references > K> > K> pf_unlink_state() releases a reference to the state without > checking if > K> this is the last reference. It can't be, because > pf_state_insert() > K> initialises it to two. KASSERT() that this is always the case. > K> > K> CID: 1347140 > K> > K> Modified: > K> head/sys/netpfil/pf/pf.c > K> > K> Modified: head/sys/netpfil/pf/pf.c > K> > ===================================================================== > ========= > K> --- head/sys/netpfil/pf/pf.c Wed Jan 24 03:09:56 2018 > (r328312) > K> +++ head/sys/netpfil/pf/pf.c Wed Jan 24 04:29:16 2018 > (r328313) > K> @@ -1613,6 +1613,7 @@ int > K> pf_unlink_state(struct pf_state *s, u_int flags) > K> { > K> struct pf_idhash *ih = &V_pf_idhash[PF_IDHASH(s)]; > K> + int last; > K> > K> if ((flags & PF_ENTER_LOCKED) == 0) > K> PF_HASHROW_LOCK(ih); > K> @@ -1653,7 +1654,8 @@ pf_unlink_state(struct pf_state *s, u_int > flags) > K> PF_HASHROW_UNLOCK(ih); > K> > K> pf_detach_state(s); > K> - refcount_release(&s->refs); > K> + last = refcount_release(&s->refs); > K> + KASSERT(last == 0, ("Incorrect state reference count")); > K> > K> return (pf_release_state(s)); > K> } > > IMHO, we shouldn't emit extra code to please Coverity. We can mark it > as a false positive in the interface. It may make sense to add a > comment > for a human to explain why return isn't checked here. > Not to mention that when KASSERT compiles to nothing, what you're left with is a "defined but not used" warning for 'last'. -- Ian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1516840498.42536.213.camel>