[SSSD] [PATCH] UTIL: Free log message when using journald

Jakub Hrozek jhrozek at redhat.com
Thu Nov 7 10:43:09 UTC 2013


On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 12:15:35PM +0100, Pavel Březina wrote:
> On 11/05/2013 12:00 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 05:32:26PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >>On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 10:35:34AM -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> >>>On Mon, 2013-10-21 at 11:01 +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>I was exercising sssd with valgrind when looking for #1020945 and
> >>>>found
> >>>>this leak.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>plain text
> >>>>document
> >>>>attachment
> >>>>(0001-UTIL-Free-log-message-when-using-journald.patch)
> >>>>
> >>>> From 3bde2833eca1fc280214da03f067e3df63040899 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> >>>>From: Jakub Hrozek <jhrozek at redhat.com>
> >>>>Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 16:52:06 +0200
> >>>>Subject: [PATCH 2/3] UTIL: Free log message when using journald
> >>>>
> >>>>---
> >>>>  src/util/sss_log.c | 2 ++
> >>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >>>>
> >>>>diff --git a/src/util/sss_log.c b/src/util/sss_log.c
> >>>>index
> >>>>5be9e7f2bc1486d83393d2d105c1a73322d7f6f1..b6b922785b03f8d9673aebdeb33a83c3f6b14076 100644
> >>>>--- a/src/util/sss_log.c
> >>>>+++ b/src/util/sss_log.c
> >>>>@@ -88,6 +88,8 @@ void sss_log(int priority, const char *format, ...)
> >>>>                      "SYSLOG_FACILITY=%i", LOG_FAC(LOG_DAEMON),
> >>>>                      "SYSLOG_IDENTIFIER=%s", debug_prg_name,
> >>>>                      NULL);
> >>>>+
> >>>>+    free(message);
> >>>>  }
> >>>>
> >>>>  #else /* WITH_JOURNALD */
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Is there any reason why we are not using talloc_vasrpintf() here and
> >>>passing in a memcontext ?
> >>>
> >>>I think I would rather fix this problem that way.
> >>>
> >>>Simo.
> >>
> >>Mostly because I copied the old syslog-based sss_log() function.
> >>
> >>But I don't think the mem_ctx is needed, the function doesn't allocate
> >>anything for its consumer, nor does it operate on any predictable
> >>structure (like state or tevent_req with tevent contexts), so I would
> >>prefer not to add a memory context to its signature.
> >
> >OK to push the patch as-is ?
> 
> Yes by me.

Pushed to master.



More information about the sssd-devel mailing list