Re: [Wireshark-dev] Fwd: [FOSDEM] Dates for FOSDEM 2012: 4 & 5 February

2011-12-28 Thread Gerald Combs
On 12/4/11 11:56 AM, Jakub Zawadzki wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 03:53:27PM -0700, Gerald Combs wrote:
>> On 10/27/11 1:07 AM, Martin Kaiser wrote:
>>>
>>> Should we register at
>>>
>>> http://fosdem.org/2012/call_for_devrooms
>>
>> I placed a request a few weeks ago. Some of the core developers and I
>> were planning to attend and the rest of the developer community is
>> welcome to join us.
> 
> Looking at http://fosdem.org/2012/devrooms_for_2012 I assume we haven't got 
> one?

Sorry for taking so long to get back to you on this. We don't have a
devroom, but we might be able to find a spot in one of the existing
rooms. Alternatively I might be able to reserve a conference room at a
nearby hotel.

I realize it's now short notice, but can anyone interested in meeting at
FOSDEM send an email to -dev or to me directly with the dates you can
attend? The main event is February 4 and 5 in Brussels, but we could
also meet on the 3rd or 6th if that's more convenient.
http://fosdem.org/2012/
___
Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list 
Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
 mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe


Re: [Wireshark-dev] [Wireshark-commits] rev 40312: /trunk/ /trunk/epan/dissectors/: packet-bt-dht.c packet-gopher.c packet-gsm_ipa.c packet-meta.c packet-mux27010.c packet-nfs.c packet-rdp.c packet-sa

2011-12-28 Thread Maynard, Chris
There are 2 other files that I believe also have tvb_get_string()-related 
memory leaks, but they are somewhat confusing to me, and so I would appreciate 
it if someone could take a look at them.

1) packet-ldap.c:dissect_ldap_Mechanism(): The comment starting at line 1160 
states the following:
/*
 * If the mechanism in this request is an empty string (which is
 * returned as a null pointer), use the saved mechanism instead.
 * Otherwise, if the saved mechanism is an empty string (null),
 * save this mechanism.
 */

But that doesn't look like what's going on.  Instead, it looks like if the 
mechanism is NULL then it is assigned to the saved mechanism ... which is never 
used, so what's the point?  And if it's NOT NULL then the saved mechanism is 
freed and assigned to the new mechanism regardless of whether the saved 
mechanism was NULL or not.  Since the code doesn't match the comment, I'm 
confused.  And I'm also not entirely sure if there is a possible 
tvb_get_string() memory leak here or not.

2) packet-wsp.c: At line 1281, there is a nice NOTE warning about ensuring to 
call g_free() since tvb_get_stringz() returns g_malloc()ed memory.  There is 
actually only 1 instance of tvb_get_stringz(); however, it is called from the 
get_text_string() macro.  get_text_string(), in turn, is called by a bunch of 
other macros, such as get_token_text(), get_extension_media(), 
get_text_value(), get_quoted_string(), get_uri_value() and get_version_value(). 
 Because all of those therefore end up calling tvb_get_stringz(), I believe we 
need to see some g_free()'s after all of them.

This doesn't look like the case, but before I went to try to fix them, I 
noticed this confusing code/comment at line 2243:
get_token_text(val_str, tvb, off, len, ok); \
/* As we're using val_str, it is automatically g_free()d */ \

There is no g_free() following that code, so I think there is a leak here and 
that the comment can't be true ... can it?  Am I missing something here?  I 
stopped looking for leaks at this point for this dissector until I can clear up 
this confusion.

Thanks.
- Chris

> -Original Message-
> From: wireshark-commits-boun...@wireshark.org [mailto:wireshark-
> commits-boun...@wireshark.org] On Behalf Of cmayn...@wireshark.org
> Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2011 11:37 AM
> To: wireshark-comm...@wireshark.org
> Subject: [Wireshark-commits] rev 40312: /trunk/
> /trunk/epan/dissectors/: packet-bt-dht.c packet-gopher.c packet-
> gsm_ipa.c packet-meta.c packet-mux27010.c packet-nfs.c packet-rdp.c
> packet-sametime.c packet-ua.c packet-xtp.c ...
> 
> http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc/viewvc.cgi?view=rev&revision=40312
> 
> User: cmaynard
> Date: 2011/12/28 08:36 AM
> 
> Log:
>  Fix memory leaks involving tvb_get_string[z]().
> 
> Directory: /trunk/epan/dissectors/
>   ChangesPath Action
>   +5 -5  packet-bt-dht.c  Modified
>   +1 -0  packet-gopher.c  Modified
>   +1 -1  packet-gsm_ipa.c Modified
>   +3 -0  packet-meta.cModified
>   +7 -5  packet-mux27010.cModified
>   +3 -0  packet-nfs.c Modified
>   +6 -6  packet-rdp.c Modified
>   +1 -1  packet-sametime.cModified
>   +4 -4  packet-ua.c  Modified
>   +1 -0  packet-xtp.c Modified
> 
> 
> (1 file not shown)
> ___
> 
> Sent via:Wireshark-commits mailing list  comm...@wireshark.org>
> Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-commits
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-commits
>  mailto:wireshark-commits-
> requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe

-- 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this email message is 
intended only for use of the intended recipient. If the reader of this message 
is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you 
have received this communication in error, please immediately delete it from 
your system and notify the sender by replying to this email.  Thank you.
___
Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list 
Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
 mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wireshark-dev] happy birthday, bug 5531!

2011-12-28 Thread Ed Beroset
https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5531

It's been a year since it was originally submitted.  As always, if there's 
anything I can do to help get this into the main code, please let me know.  I 
know a number of people that are waiting for it.  And thanks again for a mighty 
handy tool!

Ed
___
Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list 
Archives:http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
 mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe