On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 09:26 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 15:10 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 07:28:12AM -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > > On Sun, 2012-07-08 at 22:02 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote: > > > > I was not able to log in today, I was getting krb5_child segfaults. The > > > > attached patch fixed that. > > > > > > Nack. > > > > > > I fail to see how this could possibly have caused a segfault. The > > > previous version would have been printing either "true" or "false" based > > > on whether the pointer was NULL or contained a value. This was > > > incorrect, but should be impossible to segfault on. > > > > Yeah, the segfault was caused by incorrect format string. I'll send a > > separate patch for that issue. > > > > I assumed this was the reason because I no longer saw the segfault on my > > laptop, but it turned out that the crash went away only because I tested > > a build compiled with -O0, krb5_child was still crashing when compiled > > with -O2. > > > > I hate it when bugs only occur at certain optimization levels... > > > > > > > However, the new patch changes this to a dereference without checking > > > the validity of the offline pointer first. So now you've introduced the > > > possibility of a segfault if the pointer is uninitialized (though it > > > never should be). > > > > We write into the address earlier anyway, so we depended on the pointer > > validity. I've added a check, > > Ack.
Pushed to master.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
