[LTP] [PATCH v2] rpc01: fix variable not initialized

[Richard Palethorpe]

Hello,

Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz> writes:

> Hi Richie,
>
>
>> Hello,
>
>> Looks OK to me, Petr?
>
>> Acked-by: Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@suse.com>
>
> I replied at ML at v1 [1] with a question to use rc for verification.
> I'm not sure whether it was me who marked the question as superseded.

Probably me.

>
> @Hongchen you sent v1 twice, v2 twice. Duplicate send without your reply does
> not speedup things. Please next time reply with ping (but if you don't reply to
> the question, ball is on your side).

I'll mark this as changes requested.

TBH I think the test needs rewriting in the new API in pure C. So this
is likely to be wasted effort.

>
> Kind regards,
> Petr
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/Ysu+mbkO8eUP4A2+@pevik/
> [2] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/ltp/list/?submitter=84160&state=*
>
>> Hongchen Zhang <zhanghongchen@loongson.cn> writes:
>
>> > when error occurred in function callrpc/clnt_call, return_buffer may
>> > be leaved not initialized.
>> > As Petr said, we should check the return value before retrieve the
>> > return_buffer->data. Change do_compare's parameter from char * to
>> > struct data * to fix it.
>
>> > Signed-off-by: Hongchen Zhang <zhanghongchen@loongson.cn>
>> > ---
>> >  testcases/network/rpc/basic_tests/rpc01/rpc1.c | 14 ++++++++------
>> >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
>> > diff --git a/testcases/network/rpc/basic_tests/rpc01/rpc1.c b/testcases/network/rpc/basic_tests/rpc01/rpc1.c
>> > index bc9f35b..6b8619d 100644
>> > --- a/testcases/network/rpc/basic_tests/rpc01/rpc1.c
>> > +++ b/testcases/network/rpc/basic_tests/rpc01/rpc1.c
>> > @@ -18,7 +18,8 @@ char *file_name = NULL;
>> >  char host_name[100];
>> >  long host_address;
>
>> > -void do_compare(int, char *, struct data *, char *);
>> > +void do_compare(int rpc_rc, char *msg, struct data *buffer,
>> > +			struct data *ret_buffer)
>> >  void usage_error(char *program_name);
>
>> >  int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>> > @@ -128,7 +129,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>> >  	rc = callrpc(server, program, version, 1, (xdrproc_t)xdr_send_data,
>> >  			(char *)&buffer, (xdrproc_t)xdr_receive_data,
>> >  			(char *)&return_buffer);
>> > -	do_compare(rc, "callrpc", &buffer, return_buffer->data);
>> > +	do_compare(rc, "callrpc", &buffer, return_buffer);
>
>> >  	server_sin.sin_port = 0;
>> >  	sock = RPC_ANYSOCK;
>> > @@ -145,7 +146,7 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>> >  				(char *)&buffer, (xdrproc_t)xdr_receive_data,
>> >  				(char *)&return_buffer, timeout);
>> >  	clnt_destroy(clnt);
>> > -	do_compare(rc, "udp transport", &buffer, return_buffer->data);
>> > +	do_compare(rc, "udp transport", &buffer, return_buffer);
>
>> >  	server_sin.sin_port = 0;
>> >  	sock = RPC_ANYSOCK;
>> > @@ -160,12 +161,13 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>> >  				(char *)&buffer, (xdrproc_t)xdr_receive_data,
>> >  				(char *)&return_buffer, timeout);
>> >  	clnt_destroy(clnt);
>> > -	do_compare(rc, "tcp transport", &buffer, return_buffer->data);
>> > +	do_compare(rc, "tcp transport", &buffer, return_buffer);
>
>> >  	exit(0);
>> >  }
>
>> > -void do_compare(int rpc_rc, char *msg, struct data *buffer, char *ret_data)
>> > +void do_compare(int rpc_rc, char *msg, struct data *buffer,
>> > +			struct data *ret_buffer)
>> >  {
>> >  	int rc;
>
>> > @@ -175,7 +177,7 @@ void do_compare(int rpc_rc, char *msg, struct data *buffer, char *ret_data)
>> >  		printf("\n");
>> >  		exit(1);
>> >  	}
>> > -	rc = memcmp(buffer->data, ret_data, buffer->data_length);
>> > +	rc = memcmp(buffer->data, ret_buffer->data, buffer->data_length);
>> >  	if (rc) {
>> >  		printf("Data compare for %s returned %d\n", msg, rc);
>> >  		exit(1);
>> > -- 
>> > 1.8.3.1


-- 
Thank you,
Richard.