On 28/10/16 18:42, Heiko Hund wrote: > Prevent the re-allocations of memory when the internal argv grows > beyond 2 and 4 arguments by initially allocating argv to hold up to > 7 (+ trailing NULL) pointers. > > While at it rename argv_reset to argv_free to actually express > what's going on. Redo the argv_reset functionality so that it can > be used to actually reset the argv without re-allocation. > > Signed-off-by: Heiko Hund <heiko.h...@sophos.com> > --- > src/openvpn/argv.c | 45 > ++++++++++++++++++++---------------- > src/openvpn/argv.h | 2 +- > src/openvpn/console_systemd.c | 2 +- > src/openvpn/init.c | 2 +- > src/openvpn/lladdr.c | 2 +- > src/openvpn/misc.c | 4 ++-- > src/openvpn/multi.c | 10 ++++---- > src/openvpn/options.c | 2 +- > src/openvpn/plugin.c | 2 +- > src/openvpn/route.c | 8 +++---- > src/openvpn/socket.c | 4 ++-- > src/openvpn/ssl_verify.c | 6 ++--- > src/openvpn/tun.c | 23 ++++++++---------- > tests/unit_tests/openvpn/test_argv.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++----------- > 14 files changed, 85 insertions(+), 68 deletions(-) >
Code looks fairly reasonable, but I have a few comments ...
> argv_init (struct argv *a)
> {
> a->capacity = 0;
> a->argc = 0;
> a->argv = NULL;
> + argv_extend (a, 8);
Why 8? Done any performance and/or memory utilization tests? Does the
overall memory consumption increase with this?
> void
> -argv_reset (struct argv *a)
> +argv_free (struct argv *a)
This makes more sense :)
> @@ -126,10 +138,7 @@ argv_insert_head (const struct argv *a, const char *head)
> const char *
> argv_str (const struct argv *a, struct gc_arena *gc, const unsigned int
> flags)
> {
> - if (a->argv)
> - return print_argv ((const char **)a->argv, gc, flags);
> - else
> - return "";
> + return print_argv ((const char **)a->argv, gc, flags);
There are very few callers of print_argv() (defined in buffer.c).
Should we migrate print_argv() into this function and move all callers
over to argv_str() instead?
> diff --git a/src/openvpn/tun.c b/src/openvpn/tun.c
> --- a/src/openvpn/tun.c
> +++ b/src/openvpn/tun.c
tun.c:2360 close_tun() seems to be missing a argv_free(), or?
The same goes for close_tun() in tun.c:2482 and tun.c:2956
(tun.c:2821 does have it though).
Similarly, in open_tun() [tun.c:2926], argv_new() is called but no
argv_free() calls.
On a not so related note. I noticed that init.c have a
#ifdef ARGV_TEST block. That should probably also be killed; no need
for that as we have unit tests - and the argv_test() function it calls
no longer exists.
--
kind regards,
David Sommerseth
OpenVPN Technologies, Inc
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms. With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE. Training and support from Colfax. Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________ Openvpn-devel mailing list Openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-devel
