Re: [Libevent-users] [patch] more testcases

[Nick Mathewson <nickm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Leonid Evdokimov <leon@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Here are some patches.
>
> 0001 fires without following fixes

I like it; applying with a few comments and style tweaks.

(The style tweak is that I generally do

 "struct foo *bar;" rather than "struct foo* bar;"

because in C syntax, the * really does apply to the declared variable
rather than to the type.  Consider how if you want to declare bunch of
pointers, you can't say "struct foo* bar, baz, quux;")


> aff6ba1 Fix request_finished memory leak with debugging turned on.
> 9b724b2 Fix evsig_dealloc memory leak with debugging turned on.
>
> 0002 is just a preparation for 0003

I like 0002; merged that too.

> 0003 fires with current codebase but, seems, it should not. I'm sorry,
> I can't produce a nice fix right now, so I'm just sharing the testcase
> at this moment. :)

Hm.  I'll look too, but if we don't find anything, this should
probably turn into an issue on one of the trackers so that I don't
forget about it later.

event_reinit is tricky and fragile code; I am sad but not shocked to
see a bug there.  I tried poking at it a little bit with gdb to see
where the failure was happening, but the bug seemed to evaporate when
I added breakpoints: ouch.  I'll try to look more.

Have you tried running the test under valgrind?  If there's really a
double-unassign happening, it might notice something wrong.

> And the last question: should I send further patches to ML or via
> github pull request?

Both are fine!  I used to be very picky about how I got patches, but
right now I am trying to accomodate as many different workflows as
possible in order to learn more about which ones work for me.

cheers,
-- 
Nick
***********************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
unsubscribe libevent-users    in the body.