> On 20 Nov 2018, at 09:11, Petros Pissias <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks for the feedback, > I think that if your intention is to hide the "free (NULL)" calls it should > be perfectly fine, but in the general case maybe this is something that needs > to be locked at, > to see why the application is doing this. > It is currently interpreted as a "double free" as the program thinks that the > same address (0) is freed again without any intermediate allocation done at > this address.
free(NULL) is allowed by the standards and defined to do nothing, so your leak checker definitely needs to ignore it. The application doing free(NULL) is not broken. Cheers, Chris ------------------------------------------- dtrace-discuss Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/184261/=now Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=25769126 Powered by Listbox: https://www.listbox.com
