Summary: mds: Fix mds memleak detect via mdstest [#3145]
Review request for Ticket(s): 3145
Peer Reviewer(s): Minh, Vu, Thang, Gary
Pull request to: *** LIST THE PERSON WITH PUSH ACCESS HERE ***
Affected branch(es): develop
Development branch: ticket-3145
Base revision: f03fe23c17bd4e4e32dd4a1304d2ac8f247d05e7
Personal repository: git://git.code.sf.net/u/thuantr/review
--------------------------------
Impacted area Impact y/n
--------------------------------
Docs n
Build system n
RPM/packaging n
Configuration files n
Startup scripts n
SAF services y
OpenSAF services n
Core libraries n
Samples n
Tests y
Other n
NOTE: Patch(es) contain lines longer than 80 characers
Comments (indicate scope for each "y" above):
---------------------------------------------
N/A
revision 06670c821481aa8e80b27a50efe0094fafaf7e89
Author: thuan.tran <thuan.t...@dektech.com.au>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 16:33:42 +0700
mds: Fix mds memleak detect via mdstest [#3145]
- Function tet_mds_cb_enc/dec (default for broadcast type) encode/decode
received messages use 16 bits for message length but mdstest verify broadcast
big message size 66000 (> 16bits) which cause decode incorrect length and
memory does not free properly to get wrong message length.
- Also, there is a case that mds library already posting mailbox messages
(if mds_q_ownership true), but mds client does not retrieve it then uninstall
mds, a proper cleanup callback is needed to cleanup these mailbox messages.
Complete diffstat:
------------------
src/mds/apitest/mdstipc_conf.c | 28 ++++++++++++-------------
src/mds/mds_c_db.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
src/mds/mds_c_sndrcv.c | 4 ++--
src/mds/mds_core.h | 1 +
src/mds/mds_tipc_fctrl_intf.cc | 9 ++++++++-
5 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
Testing Commands:
-----------------
N/A
Testing, Expected Results:
--------------------------
N/A
Conditions of Submission:
-------------------------
ACK by reviewers
Arch Built Started Linux distro
-------------------------------------------
mips n n
mips64 n n
x86 n n
x86_64 y y
powerpc n n
powerpc64 n n
Reviewer Checklist:
-------------------
[Submitters: make sure that your review doesn't trigger any checkmarks!]
Your checkin has not passed review because (see checked entries):
___ Your RR template is generally incomplete; it has too many blank entries
that need proper data filled in.
___ You have failed to nominate the proper persons for review and push.
___ Your patches do not have proper short+long header
___ You have grammar/spelling in your header that is unacceptable.
___ You have exceeded a sensible line length in your headers/comments/text.
___ You have failed to put in a proper Trac Ticket # into your commits.
___ You have incorrectly put/left internal data in your comments/files
(i.e. internal bug tracking tool IDs, product names etc)
___ You have not given any evidence of testing beyond basic build tests.
Demonstrate some level of runtime or other sanity testing.
___ You have ^M present in some of your files. These have to be removed.
___ You have needlessly changed whitespace or added whitespace crimes
like trailing spaces, or spaces before tabs.
___ You have mixed real technical changes with whitespace and other
cosmetic code cleanup changes. These have to be separate commits.
___ You need to refactor your submission into logical chunks; there is
too much content into a single commit.
___ You have extraneous garbage in your review (merge commits etc)
___ You have giant attachments which should never have been sent;
Instead you should place your content in a public tree to be pulled.
___ You have too many commits attached to an e-mail; resend as threaded
commits, or place in a public tree for a pull.
___ You have resent this content multiple times without a clear indication
of what has changed between each re-send.
___ You have failed to adequately and individually address all of the
comments and change requests that were proposed in the initial review.
___ You have a misconfigured ~/.gitconfig file (i.e. user.name, user.email etc)
___ Your computer have a badly configured date and time; confusing the
the threaded patch review.
___ Your changes affect IPC mechanism, and you don't present any results
for in-service upgradability test.
___ Your changes affect user manual and documentation, your patch series
do not contain the patch that updates the Doxygen manual.
_______________________________________________
Opensaf-devel mailing list
Opensaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensaf-devel
