On 05/24/2010 12:10 PM, Nigel Jones wrote:
>From 6c8183e83fbfeb031b16cf9ae2d41b16e3145378 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
2001
From: Nigel Jones <dev(a)nigelj.com>
Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 15:05:53 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] Patch 2 memory leaks.
1. Ensure that memory is free'd from udevAddOneDevice() if the return
value will be non-zero
2. Release udev device reference in udevEventHandleCallback()
similar to the release of the reference in udevProcessDeviceListEntry()
---
src/node_device/node_device_udev.c | 4 ++++
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/node_device/node_device_udev.c
b/src/node_device/node_device_udev.c
index a1ced87..4d0effa 100644
--- a/src/node_device/node_device_udev.c
+++ b/src/node_device/node_device_udev.c
@@ -1296,6 +1296,9 @@ static int udevAddOneDevice(struct udev_device *device)
ret = 0;
out:
+ if (ret != 0) {
+ virNodeDeviceDefFree(def); /* Free assigned memory to prevent leaks */
+ }
return ret;
}
@@ -1426,6 +1429,7 @@ static void udevEventHandleCallback(int watch
ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
}
out:
+ udev_device_unref(device);
return;
}
Good catch on both of these. I had to convince myself that udev_device_unref()
would handle a NULL device (in the case of error before we allocated device), but it
does.
ACK
--
Chris Lalancette