Re: [Wireshark-commits] rev 45445: /trunk/epan/ /trunk/epan/: emem.c

[Evan Huus <eapache () gmail com>]

On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 9:50 AM, Jakub Zawadzki
<darkjames-ws () darkjames pl> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 09:32:07AM -0400, Evan Huus wrote:
> > The fix is needed regardless of what else happens - even with the old
> > old allocator this was still a bug
> > (in the sl_ allocator, if not the ep_ one)
>
> Nah, sl_ allocator don't have this bug.
>
> 1. Right now sl_free_all() is never used
> 2. even if it would be, there's no guard pages so
>    npc->buf is not shifted, and
>    npc->amount_free_init has correct size value.
>
> And I'm mainly worried about sl_ allocator, cause with that commit
> I added another 12 bytes to emem_chunk_t...
>
> > I land proper sharing of free pages between pools then this path will
> > probably stop being hit again (just like before).
> >
> > I don't want to make promises I can't keep, but I have an idea I'm
> > pretty sure will work, and Thursday evening is looking promising for
> > time to implement it. I'll make sure to test with both allocation
> > schemes this time though!
>
> I still think that https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5284#c26
> would also fix the problem, and we just unnecessary overcomplicate allocator.

Is that not the same idea Guy and Jeff discussed that earlier in the
bug (comments 2 through 6)?
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe