On (27/08/14 17:10), Pavel Reichl wrote:
On 08/27/2014 10:09 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>warning reported by coverity
>patch is attached
As I understand the code there is no way that 0 could be passed as second
argument to the realloc call, right? Because that would lead to freeing same
Would it be more defensive approach to test for zero argument explicitly?
What do you think Lukas?
NULL can be returned if there is not memory for allocation (ENOMEM).
For example you will try to allocate 2^31 bytes