2005-05-04 16:05:16

by Pedro Monjo Florit

Subject: [Bluez-users] sdptool

Hi!

I am following the code of sdptool.c and I have a question. I am
comparing add_sp() and add_opush() and I have found something that
puzzles me. The first part of the code is almost the same, but there are
some sdp_list_free() calls in add_opush() that are present in add_sp().
For example:

static int add_sp(sdp_session_t *session, svc_info_t *si)
{
/* ... */
sdp_uuid16_create(&sp_uuid, SERIAL_PORT_SVCLASS_ID);
svclass_id = sdp_list_append(0, &sp_uuid);
sdp_set_service_classes(&record, svclass_id);
sdp_list_free(svclass_id, 0);
/* ... */
}

static int add_opush(sdp_session_t *session, svc_info_t *si)
{
/* ... */
sdp_uuid16_create(&opush_uuid, OBEX_OBJPUSH_SVCLASS_ID);
svclass_id = sdp_list_append(0, &opush_uuid);
sdp_set_service_classes(&record, svclass_id);
/* ... */
}

Is this correct? Shouldn't there be a call to sdp_list_free(svclass_id,
0) in add_opush() too? As I understand it, this means that add_opush()
has a memory leak, isn't it? I have found at least three missing calls
to sdp_list_free() in add_opush().

Regards,

Pedro Monjo


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: NEC IT Guy Games.
Get your fingers limbered up and give it your best shot. 4 great events, 4
opportunities to win big! Highest score wins.NEC IT Guy Games. Play to
win an NEC 61 plasma display. Visit http://www.necitguy.com/?r=20
_______________________________________________
Bluez-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-users

2005-05-04 17:03:44

by Stephen Crane

Subject: Re: [Bluez-users] sdptool

Hi Pedro,
You could run valgrind on the different runs of sdptool to verify that
there is a leak here. Send in a patch!

Cheers,
Steve

On Wed, 2005-05-04 at 18:05 +0200, Pedro Monjo Florit wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I am following the code of sdptool.c and I have a question. I am
> comparing add_sp() and add_opush() and I have found something that
> puzzles me. The first part of the code is almost the same, but there are
> some sdp_list_free() calls in add_opush() that are present in add_sp().
> For example:
>
> static int add_sp(sdp_session_t *session, svc_info_t *si)
> {
> /* ... */
> sdp_uuid16_create(&sp_uuid, SERIAL_PORT_SVCLASS_ID);
> svclass_id = sdp_list_append(0, &sp_uuid);
> sdp_set_service_classes(&record, svclass_id);
> sdp_list_free(svclass_id, 0);
> /* ... */
> }
>
> static int add_opush(sdp_session_t *session, svc_info_t *si)
> {
> /* ... */
> sdp_uuid16_create(&opush_uuid, OBEX_OBJPUSH_SVCLASS_ID);
> svclass_id = sdp_list_append(0, &opush_uuid);
> sdp_set_service_classes(&record, svclass_id);
> /* ... */
> }
>
> Is this correct? Shouldn't there be a call to sdp_list_free(svclass_id,
> 0) in add_opush() too? As I understand it, this means that add_opush()
> has a memory leak, isn't it? I have found at least three missing calls
> to sdp_list_free() in add_opush().
>
> Regards,
>
> Pedro Monjo
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: NEC IT Guy Games.
> Get your fingers limbered up and give it your best shot. 4 great events, 4
> opportunities to win big! Highest score wins.NEC IT Guy Games. Play to
> win an NEC 61 plasma display. Visit http://www.necitguy.com/?r=20
> _______________________________________________
> Bluez-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-users
--
Stephen Crane, Rococo Software Ltd. http://www.rococosoft.com
[email protected] +353-1-6601315 (ext 209)



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: NEC IT Guy Games.
Get your fingers limbered up and give it your best shot. 4 great events, 4
opportunities to win big! Highest score wins.NEC IT Guy Games. Play to
win an NEC 61 plasma display. Visit http://www.necitguy.com/?r=20
_______________________________________________
Bluez-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-users