s390: Fix string comparison in bd_s390_zfcp_scsi_offline#1160
Merged
vojtechtrefny merged 2 commits intostoraged-project:masterfrom Jan 13, 2026
Merged
Conversation
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughReplaced pointer equality checks with string content comparisons and added trimming of trailing newlines ( Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~8 minutes 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing touches
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (42)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Fix all issues with AI agents
In @src/plugins/s390.c:
- Line 886: The getline()-allocated strings fcphbasysfs, fcpwwpnsysfs and
fcplunsysfs retain trailing newlines which causes g_strcmp0 comparisons against
devno, wwpn and lun to fail; after each getline() that produces those three
variables (the same locations where fcphbasysfs/fcpwwpnsysfs/fcplunsysfs are
assigned) call g_strchomp() on the buffer to strip trailing whitespace before
any g_strcmp0() comparison (used in the SCSI deletion/matching logic and invoked
by callers such as bd_s390_zfcp_scsi_offline_from_dev). Ensure you add
g_strchomp(fcphbasysfs), g_strchomp(fcpwwpnsysfs) and g_strchomp(fcplunsysfs)
immediately after their respective getline() returns.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
src/plugins/s390.c
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (42)
- GitHub Check: testing-farm:fedora-43-aarch64
- GitHub Check: testing-farm:fedora-43-aarch64
- GitHub Check: testing-farm:fedora-43-x86_64
- GitHub Check: testing-farm:fedora-43-x86_64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-43-aarch64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-rawhide-aarch64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-43-x86_64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-43-x86_64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-rawhide-x86_64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-43-ppc64le
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-43-ppc64le
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-43-aarch64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-rawhide-aarch64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-rawhide-x86_64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-rawhide-ppc64le
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-rawhide-ppc64le
- GitHub Check: testing-farm:fedora-43-x86_64:revdeps_udisks
- GitHub Check: testing-farm:fedora-43-x86_64:revdeps_blivet
- GitHub Check: testing-farm:fedora-43-x86_64
- GitHub Check: testing-farm:fedora-43-aarch64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-rawhide-ppc64le
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-rawhide-x86_64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-43-x86_64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-rawhide-aarch64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-43-aarch64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-43-ppc64le
- GitHub Check: compilation (clang-16)
- GitHub Check: compilation (gcc-10)
- GitHub Check: compilation (gcc-11)
- GitHub Check: compilation (gcc-12)
- GitHub Check: compilation (clang-14)
- GitHub Check: compilation (clang-18)
- GitHub Check: compilation (clang-17)
- GitHub Check: compilation (clang-15)
- GitHub Check: compilation (gcc-13)
- GitHub Check: compilation (gcc-14)
- GitHub Check: csmock
- GitHub Check: symbols
- GitHub Check: Analyze (cpp)
- GitHub Check: udisks-build
- GitHub Check: blivet-tests
- GitHub Check: Analyze (python)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Caution
Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.
⚠️ Outside diff range comments (1)
src/plugins/s390.c (1)
775-927: Fix is correct; critical memory leaks and logic error need addressing.The
g_strcmp0()comparison fix is correct for string content equality. However, the function has serious issues:Memory leaks:
lineallocated bygetline()at loop start is never freedscsidevandscsidelare reassigned each iteration without per-iteration cleanup, leaking previous allocationsLogic error: The function always returns
TRUE(line 228) even when no matching device is found. This violates the docstring contract ("Returns: whether a LUN was successfully removed") and makes the caller's success check at line 112 meaningless.Required fixes:
- Free
lineafter the loop ends- Add per-iteration cleanup:
g_free(scsidev); g_free(scsidel);before loop end- Track whether a device was actually deleted and either return that status or at minimum log a warning if no match found
📜 Review details
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
src/plugins/s390.c
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (42)
- GitHub Check: testing-farm:fedora-43-x86_64
- GitHub Check: testing-farm:fedora-43-aarch64
- GitHub Check: testing-farm:fedora-43-aarch64
- GitHub Check: testing-farm:fedora-43-x86_64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-rawhide-aarch64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-rawhide-aarch64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-43-x86_64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-43-x86_64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-rawhide-x86_64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-43-ppc64le
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-rawhide-ppc64le
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-43-aarch64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-43-ppc64le
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-rawhide-ppc64le
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-43-aarch64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-rawhide-x86_64
- GitHub Check: testing-farm:fedora-43-x86_64:revdeps_udisks
- GitHub Check: testing-farm:fedora-43-x86_64:revdeps_blivet
- GitHub Check: testing-farm:fedora-43-aarch64
- GitHub Check: testing-farm:fedora-43-x86_64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-43-aarch64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-43-x86_64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-rawhide-x86_64
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-43-ppc64le
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-rawhide-ppc64le
- GitHub Check: rpm-build:fedora-rawhide-aarch64
- GitHub Check: compilation (clang-16)
- GitHub Check: blivet-tests
- GitHub Check: udisks-build
- GitHub Check: Analyze (python)
- GitHub Check: compilation (gcc-14)
- GitHub Check: Analyze (cpp)
- GitHub Check: compilation (clang-17)
- GitHub Check: compilation (clang-14)
- GitHub Check: compilation (clang-15)
- GitHub Check: compilation (gcc-12)
- GitHub Check: compilation (clang-18)
- GitHub Check: compilation (gcc-10)
- GitHub Check: compilation (gcc-11)
- GitHub Check: compilation (gcc-13)
- GitHub Check: symbols
- GitHub Check: csmock
🔇 Additional comments (3)
src/plugins/s390.c (3)
803-818: Good: strip trailing newline fromhba_idbefore comparison.
getline()commonly includes the trailing\n; chompingfcphbasysfsavoids false mismatches later.
834-850: Good: strip trailing newline fromwwpnread from sysfs.This makes the subsequent WWPN match deterministic.
867-885: Good: strip trailing newline fromfcp_lunread from sysfs.Prevents spurious mismatches on the LUN comparison.
tbzatek
approved these changes
Jan 12, 2026
Member
tbzatek
left a comment
tbzatek
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I can't believe the string comparison was done that way!
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary by CodeRabbit
✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.