You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
static char **get_str_cfg_array(struct collection_item *item,
46 int include,
47 const char *sep,
48 int *size,
49 int *error)
will leak memory if the config string starts from spaces.
It looks like the optimization that I tried to implement has a flaw. I do not see a way to overcome this issue other than rewrite the function to copy data for each string in the array.
I took a closer look at this one. I think I misread the code. I added a unit test for the case that I suspected might fail but it passed and I think after reading code again that it is correct.
Closing the issue.
I took a closer look at this one. I think I misread the code. I added a unit test for the case that I suspected might fail but it passed and I think after reading code again that it is correct.
Closing the issue.
I took a closer look at this one. I think I misread the code. I added a unit test for the case that I suspected might fail but it passed and I think after reading code again that it is correct.
Closing the issue.
Cloned from Pagure issue: https://pagure.io/SSSD/sssd/issue/737
Function
will leak memory if the config string starts from spaces.
It looks like the optimization that I tried to implement has a flaw. I do not see a way to overcome this issue other than rewrite the function to copy data for each string in the array.
Comments
Comment from sgallagh at 2010-12-17 14:27:59
Fields changed
coverity: => 10043
keywords: => Coverity
Comment from sgallagh at 2010-12-17 14:27:59
Fields changed
coverity: => 10043
keywords: => Coverity
Comment from sgallagh at 2010-12-17 14:27:59
Fields changed
coverity: => 10043
keywords: => Coverity
Comment from dpal at 2010-12-21 01:37:13
I took a closer look at this one. I think I misread the code. I added a unit test for the case that I suspected might fail but it passed and I think after reading code again that it is correct.
Closing the issue.
resolution: => invalid
status: new => closed
Comment from dpal at 2010-12-21 01:37:13
I took a closer look at this one. I think I misread the code. I added a unit test for the case that I suspected might fail but it passed and I think after reading code again that it is correct.
Closing the issue.
resolution: => invalid
status: new => closed
Comment from dpal at 2010-12-21 01:37:13
I took a closer look at this one. I think I misread the code. I added a unit test for the case that I suspected might fail but it passed and I think after reading code again that it is correct.
Closing the issue.
resolution: => invalid
status: new => closed
Comment from dpal at 2012-01-19 03:26:16
Fields changed
rhbz: => 0
Comment from dpal at 2012-01-19 03:26:16
Fields changed
rhbz: => 0
Comment from dpal at 2012-01-19 03:26:16
Fields changed
rhbz: => 0
Comment from dpal at 2017-02-24 14:39:47
Metadata Update from @dpal:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: