[vdr] 1.3.22: memory leaks
daniel.thompson at st.com
Wed Mar 30 10:34:14 CEST 2005
Stefan Huelswitt wrote:
> On 29 Mar 2005 Daniel THOMPSON <daniel.thompson at st.com> wrote:
>>There are routes through tComponent::FromString() that explicitly set
>>description to NULL without checking its value first (when n != 4). This
>>appears to me to be the leak.
>>Running the following code it is obvious that glibc malloc'ed desc even
>>when desc is not converted.
> Wow, this is cool. How did you get the idea to search in that
I got the idea from the reading your patch and the premise that it was
unlikely that there was a bug in glibc.
Put simply I *never* blame core software like glibc or the compiler for
bugs unless it is proved to me. These bits of software are so widely
used that while blaming them is not *always* wrong it usually saves a
lot of time to audit your own code first. Also I've met Ulrich Drepper
and wouldn't want to let him catch me blaming glibc for something it
> Anyways, I think the man page isn't very clear on this fact...
Agreed and I guess this is why the 'know your interfaces' maxim is so
>>While that are more robust ways to handle the case then desc is NULL
>>(which for my glibc it never is) the above code is safe since both
>>isempty() and glibc's free() can safely handle NULL pointers.
> What about this?
> if (description!=NULL && (n != 4 || isempty(description)))
Looks fine to me. For belt and braces we should probably also assert
that description is NULL when we enter the call (or test it and free it).
Daniel Thompson (STMicroelectronics) <daniel.thompson at st.com>
1000 Aztec West, Almondsbury, Bristol, BS32 4SQ. 01454 462659
If a car is a horseless carriage then is a motorcycle a horseless horse?
More information about the vdr