On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 19:33 +0100, Michal Židek wrote: > On 03/06/2013 07:27 PM, Michal Židek wrote: > > On 03/06/2013 07:18 PM, Michal Židek wrote: > >> On 03/06/2013 06:33 PM, Simo Sorce wrote: > >>> On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 17:09 +0100, Michal Židek wrote: > >>>> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1826 > >>>> > >>>> See commit message. > >>> > >>> It would be better if you can use a destructor attached to the mc_ctx > >>> so any other path where we need to free it is automatically covered. > >>> > >>> Simo. > >>> > >> > >> New patch attached. > >> > >> Thanks > >> Michal > >> > >> > > There should be goto done, not ret... will send another patch soon. > > > > Here it is.
The destructors can return only 0 or -1. And they shoul return -1 exclusively when they want to make the talloc_free() operation fail. In this case we should probably never return anything but 0, because even on failure we want to still free the mc_ctx. Also I think failing to close the file or unmapping should be major failures (much higher debug level) as they cause memory/resource leaks that will quickly make the process unusuable. Simo. -- Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York _______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel