On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 12:05 AM, Milian Wolff <milian.wo...@kdab.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, September 7, 2017 4:58:53 PM CEST Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> Hi Milian,
>
> Hey Namhyung!
>
>> > > > > @@ -511,10 +563,63 @@ void inline_node__delete(struct inline_node
>> > > > > *node)
>> > > > >
>> > > > > list_for_each_entry_safe(ilist, tmp, &node->val, list) {
>> > > > >
>> > > > > list_del_init(&ilist->list);
>> > > > >
>> > > > > - zfree(&ilist->filename);
>> > > > > - zfree(&ilist->funcname);
>> > > > > + zfree(&ilist->srcline);
>> > > > > + // only the inlined symbols are owned by the list
>> > > > > + if (ilist->symbol && ilist->symbol->inlined)
>> > > > > + symbol__delete(ilist->symbol);
>> > > >
>> > > > Existing symbols are released at this moment.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks for the review, I'll try to look into these issues once I have
>> > > more
>> > > time again.
>> >
>> > OK, so I just dug into this part of the patch again. I don't think it's
>> > actually a problem after all:
>> >
>> > When an inline node reuses the real symbol, that symbol won't have its
>> > `inlined` member set to true. Thus these symbols will never get deleted by
>> > inline_node__delete.
>>
>> But ilist->symbol is a dangling pointer so accessing ->inlined would
>> be a problem, no?
>
> Sorry, but I can't follow. Why would it be a dangling pointer? Note, again,
> that I've tested this with both valgrind and ASAN and neither reports any
> issues about this code.
IIUC, ilist->symbol can point an existing symbol. And all existing
symbols are freed before calling inline_node__delete(). I don't know
why valgrind or asan didn't catch anything.. maybe I'm missing
something.
--
Thanks,
Namhyung
