On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 08:55:50AM -0500, John Ferlan wrote:
>
>
> On 12/11/2017 08:37 AM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 07:58:54AM -0500, John Ferlan wrote:
> >>> +char *
> >>> +xenMakeIPList(virNetDevIPInfoPtr guestIP)
> >>> +{
> >>> + size_t i;
> >>> + char **address_array;
> >>> + char *ret = NULL;
> >>> +
> >>> + if (VIR_ALLOC_N(address_array, guestIP->nips + 1) < 0)
> >>> + return NULL;
> >>> +
> >>> + for (i = 0; i < guestIP->nips; i++) {
> >>> + address_array[i] = virSocketAddrFormat(&guestIP->ips[i]->address);
> >>> + if (!address_array[i])
> >>> + goto cleanup;
> >>> + }
> >>> + address_array[guestIP->nips] = NULL;
> >>> +
> >>> + ret = virStringListJoin((const char**)address_array, " ");
> >>> +
> >>> + cleanup:
> >>> + while (i > 0)
> >>> + VIR_FREE(address_array[--i]);
> >>
> >> Coverity notes that address_array is leaked. May I sugguest
> >> "virStringListFree()" on address array?
> >
> > Then I should initialize each entry to NULL first (which will be
> > overridden a moment later). Is it ok?
> >
>
> Not sure I understand the question as VIR_ALLOC_N allocates
> address_array with guestIP->nips + 1 NULL 'char *' entries. Then your
> for loop fills the entries[i].... The "address_array[guestIP->nips] =
> NULL;" would seem superfluous too I guess. I wasn't initially looking
> beyond the memory leak. There's plenty of examples using VIR_ALLOC_N
> in the code that you can see how each array entry is free'd as well as
> the containing structure.
Ah, I've missed the part that VIR_ALLOC_N initialize memory with zeros.
--
Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
