Re: [RFC PATCH v3 00/17] Return of smart HTTP

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 22 Oct 2009, Nanako Shiraishi wrote:

> Quoting "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> > Actually, after some further research, the bug is not Johan's but is
> > actually Daniel's.  Johan, I apologize for claiming it was your bug.
> > ...
> > Long story short, transport_close() is what is supposed to perform
> > the work that disconnect_helper does, as its the final thing right
> > before we free the struct transport block.  Free'ing the data block
> > inside of the fetch or push functions is wrong.
> >
> > Its fine to close the helper and restart it within the single
> > lifespan of a struct transport, but dammit, don't free the
> > struct helper_data until transport_close().
> 
> Ping? Are there any progress on this issue?

Ah, right. Shawn's analysis is correct, and I should have a different 
function to just finish the helper, but leave the rest of the data alone. 
(when I wrote it originally, I didn't have anything other than the 
connection in there, so it was right to clear it, but now there's a real 
helper_data and it needs to do the right things).

	-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]