pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] PCP bugs from SGI

To: kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [pcp] PCP bugs from SGI
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 11:52:56 +1100 (EST)
Cc: Greg Banks <greg.n.banks@xxxxxxxxx>, pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx, Martin Hicks <mort@xxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <1268429609.2642.690.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
----- "Ken McDonell" <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> OK, this was sloppy coding on my part, but it has probability of
> occurrence that close to, or less than, the chance that I'll live to
> 100
> years old.
> 
> Because I'm retired and have nothing better to do (sigh), the
> attached
> patch addresses the issue ... if someone else would care to review it
> and it looks acceptable, I'll gladly commit it into my oss tree.

Looking good.

The memory allocation based on the ntohl(pduProfile->numprof), or
instprof->profile_len, value looks like it could still use some
kind of ceiling sanity test?  (as per Gregs bug)

That teardown (and setup) kinda sucks in that its a number of small
allocations, which need to be undone from wherever-we-got-up-to on
failure.  Guess we are too late to change this to one big contiguous
malloc now though (are we?  I didn't follow the code all the way up)

cheers.

-- 
Nathan

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>