On 2/18/19 12:00 PM, Chuck Lever wrote:
>> I also took a look at how freeaddrinfo(3) in glibc works:
>>
>> void
>> freeaddrinfo (struct addrinfo *ai)
>> {
>> struct addrinfo *p;
>>
>> while (ai != NULL)
>> {
>> p = ai;
>> ai = ai->ai_next;
>> free (p->ai_canonname);
>> free (p);
>> }
>> }
>> It makes the assumption that ai_canonname is
>> free-able memory....
> Right, I seem to recall looking at this implementation when
> I wrote the IPv6 support for nfs-utils. That seems sensible
> to me.
>
> However Peter's point is not all C libraries have to work
> that way, and I can see that argument too.
I agreed....
>
> I have no objection to taking his fix as long as the hunk
> in host_numeric_addrinfo() is dropped while we figure out
> a more complete fix for that issue.
Taking it out I can see us getting flagged for possible memory leaking....
Taking a look to why those frees were add... see commit 94ce1eb9
They should look very familiar to you ;-)
> I would also like to
> see his fix use a helper like nfs_freeaddrinfo(), but that
> is only a suggestion.
That is a good suggestion... It definitely cleans up the code.
steved.
>
>
