From nobody Wed May 1 22:40:56 2024 Delivered-To: importer@patchew.org Received-SPF: pass (zoho.com: domain of redhat.com designates 209.132.183.28 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.183.28; envelope-from=libvir-list-bounces@redhat.com; helo=mx1.redhat.com; Authentication-Results: mx.zohomail.com; spf=pass (zoho.com: domain of redhat.com designates 209.132.183.28 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=libvir-list-bounces@redhat.com Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1510153806766995.5747319414435; Wed, 8 Nov 2017 07:10:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05ABD87649; Wed, 8 Nov 2017 15:10:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (colo-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.20]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCE6C6445E; Wed, 8 Nov 2017 15:10:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.19.33]) by colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93C161800BDC; Wed, 8 Nov 2017 15:10:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id vA8FA4R0004175 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 2017 10:10:04 -0500 Received: by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) id 1122C649B4; Wed, 8 Nov 2017 15:10:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from moe.brq.redhat.com (unknown [10.43.2.192]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D1286445E for ; Wed, 8 Nov 2017 15:10:00 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 05ABD87649 Authentication-Results: ext-mx02.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx02.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=libvir-list-bounces@redhat.com From: Michal Privoznik To: libvir-list@redhat.com Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2017 16:09:57 +0100 Message-Id: <262e3d77e46564bbd7ac73297fa4839422703e79.1510153797.git.mprivozn@redhat.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 X-loop: libvir-list@redhat.com Subject: [libvirt] [PATCH] qemu-ns: Detect /dev/* mount point duplicates even better X-BeenThere: libvir-list@redhat.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: junk List-Id: Development discussions about the libvirt library & tools List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: libvir-list-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: libvir-list-bounces@redhat.com X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.26]); Wed, 08 Nov 2017 15:10:05 +0000 (UTC) X-ZohoMail: RSF_0 Z_629925259 SPT_0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" In 4f1570720218302 I've tried to make duplicates detection for nested /dev mount better. However, I've missed the obvious case when there are two same mount points. For instance if: # mount --bind /dev/blah /dev/blah # mount --bind /dev/blah /dev/blah Yeah, very unlikely but possible. Signed-off-by: Michal Privoznik --- src/qemu/qemu_domain.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_domain.c b/src/qemu/qemu_domain.c index 702463547..61d28337b 100644 --- a/src/qemu/qemu_domain.c +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_domain.c @@ -8352,7 +8352,7 @@ qemuDomainGetPreservedMounts(virQEMUDriverConfigPtr c= fg, while (j < nmounts) { char *c =3D STRSKIP(mounts[j], mounts[i]); =20 - if (c && *c =3D=3D '/') { + if (c && (*c =3D=3D '/' || *c =3D=3D '\0')) { VIR_DEBUG("Dropping path %s because of %s", mounts[j], mou= nts[i]); VIR_DELETE_ELEMENT(mounts, j, nmounts); } else { --=20 2.13.6 -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list