Fix possible ByteBuf leak when CompositeByteBuf is resized #8946
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
normanmaurer
approved these changes
Mar 15, 2019
|
@netty-bot test this please |
|
Can one of the admins verify this patch? |
|
@netty-bot test this please |
Motivation: The special case fixed in netty#8497 also requires that we keep a derived slice when trimming components in place, as done by the capacity(int) and discardReadBytes() methods. Modifications: Ensure that we keep a ref to trimmed components' original retained slice in capacity(int) and discardReadBytes() methods, so that it is released properly when the they are later freed. Add unit test which fails prior to the fix. Result: Edge case leak is eliminated.
|
FYI I just updated the commit message to fix a typo |
|
@netty-bot test this please |
trustin
approved these changes
Mar 22, 2019
normanmaurer
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 22, 2019
Motivation: The special case fixed in #8497 also requires that we keep a derived slice when trimming components in place, as done by the capacity(int) and discardReadBytes() methods. Modifications: Ensure that we keep a ref to trimmed components' original retained slice in capacity(int) and discardReadBytes() methods, so that it is released properly when the they are later freed. Add unit test which fails prior to the fix. Result: Edge case leak is eliminated.
|
@njhill thanks! |
jtgrabowski
pushed a commit
to riptano/netty
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 22, 2019
Motivation: The special case fixed in netty#8497 also requires that we keep a derived slice when trimming components in place, as done by the capacity(int) and discardReadBytes() methods. Modifications: Ensure that we keep a ref to trimmed components' original retained slice in capacity(int) and discardReadBytes() methods, so that it is released properly when the they are later freed. Add unit test which fails prior to the fix. Result: Edge case leak is eliminated.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Motivation:
The special case fixed in #8497 also requires that we keep a derived slice when trimming components in place, as done by the
capacity(int)anddiscardReadBytes()methods.Modifications:
Ensure that we keep a ref to trimmed components' original retained slice in
capacity(int)anddiscardReadBytes()methods, so that it is released properly when the they are later freed. Add unit test which fails prior to the fix.Result:
Edge case leak is eliminated.