Wireshark mailing list archives

Re: register_tap_listener memleak


From: Peter Wu <peter () lekensteyn nl>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2018 18:48:49 +0100

Hi Jakub,

On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 06:33:28PM +0100, Jakub Zawadzki wrote:
Hi Peter,

W dniu 2018-03-15 13:24, Peter Wu napisaƂ(a):
I was looking at memleaks as reported by LSAN while running the
decryption test suite, there are quite a number of occurrences.

One of them is tap (return value of register_tap_listener) which is a
GString which seems unnecessary since it is an error message which the
caller should not have to modify. Dario tried to convert that to a gchar
before in https://code.wireshark.org/review/15270 but that particular
patch was reverted in v2.1.1rc0-197-ga383e692c8.

Pascal tried again in https://code.wireshark.org/review/16053, but
somehow it also got stuck. Before trying to touch this again, is there
something to be aware of? I just want to modify register_tap_listener:

- Change GString to char *
- Either use NULL wmem scope or use g_strdup_printf.
- Add G_GNUC_WARN_UNUSED_RESULT such that callers will not accidentally
  leak any error messages.
- Modify callers such that they do check the error. (g_warning?)


Can register_tap_listener() return enum code (one of: success, not found,
wrong filter)?
You will get rid of memleak, and users will get nicely translated message
error.

That sounds like a great idea at first, but it seems not viable given
that the error messages are:

- "Tap <tapname parameter> not found"
- "Filter "<fstring parameter>" is invalid - <dfilter_compile error>"

The few dissectors that do check the return value just use
"report_failure" or something like that. Do you think it is better to
introduce an "error" argument, receiving a gchar*? If NULL, then use
"g_warning" within the API, otherwise return it.
-- 
Kind regards,
Peter Wu
https://lekensteyn.nl
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe

Current thread: