From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-71437-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 18714 invoked by alias); 26 Mar 2010 12:50:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 18703 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Mar 2010 12:50:34 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 12:50:30 +0000
Received: (qmail 10663 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2010 12:50:28 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO macbook-2.local) (stan@127.0.0.2)   by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 26 Mar 2010 12:50:28 -0000
Message-ID: <4BACAD8F.3030909@codesourcery.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 12:50:00 -0000
From: Stan Shebs <stan@codesourcery.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Macintosh/20100228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Stan Shebs <stan@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/commit] Handle errors in tracepoint target agent
References: <4BAC1426.5050003@codesourcery.com> <201003261140.09071.pedro@codesourcery.com>
In-Reply-To: <201003261140.09071.pedro@codesourcery.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-03/txt/msg00882.txt.bz2

Pedro Alves wrote:
> On Friday 26 March 2010 01:55:50, Stan Shebs wrote:
>   
>>  The error message is never NULL, I added the MI 
>> status bit overlooked before, 
>>     
>
> But now, `error_desc' is leaking in the case you xmalloc it.
>   
It was leaking before. :-)  It needs to stick around indefinitely; it 
guess it would work to free an old one just before allocating a new one.
> When you fix that leak, you'll stumble of the fact that
> in some cases you have this:
>
>  ts->error_desc = ""
>
> while in others you have this:
>
>  ts->error_desc = (char *) xmalloc (p2 - p1 + 1);
>   
No, because the p2 != p1 test prior ensures we only allocate non-empty 
strings.
> How can you reliably know if you may xfree
> ts->error_desc that way?  xfree ("") is a no go.
> Comparing a pointer with "" is also not good.
>   
strlen.

Stan