Re: [PATCH 2 of 4] Fix various resource leaks throughout sendlib.c
Hi,
* Erik Hovland wrote:
> >> - FREE (tcode); /* __FREE_CHECKED__ */
> >> + FREE (&tcode); /* __FREE_CHECKED__ */
> >
> > The same for the use of FREE(). This is probably wrong.
> I'll have to look again. But if I recall tcode is allocated and since
> FREE takes the pointer to the pointer, the & is required. But I am not
> in front of my workstation right now. So I will defer to your
> guidance.
My fault, I didn't check it thoroughly enough. tocode is allocated as an
array and should be FREE(&tocode). Valgrind also reports a leak on fcode
so I fixed that, too plus the other leaks as b5cbd0dab863. I've
separated the fpin change to give bisect a chance in case something goes
wrong, it's pushed as 4fe35e9984ba. Thanks.
> >> - CONTEXT f;
> >> + CONTEXT *f = NULL;
> >
> > Here I don't understand what the leak should be. It just changes from
> > stack to allocated memory causing more overhead I think. Can you explain
> > why you change this?
> Heh, the problem here is that the function that clears CONTEXT f
> returns a pointer as an error indicator.
[...]
I see. mx_open_mailbox() allocates memory if you pass a null
pointer. Shouldn't that also be released somewhere?
Rocco