This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] stack.c, memory leak (no-effect code?)

From: msnyder at sonic dot net
To: msnyder at sonic dot net
Cc: "Jim Blandy" <jimb at codesourcery dot com>, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 17:20:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] stack.c, memory leak (no-effect code?)
References: <5638.12.7.175.2.1186784359.squirrel@webmail.sonic.net> <m3ps1rusrx.fsf@codesourcery.com> <16770.12.7.175.2.1187044033.squirrel@webmail.sonic.net>

>>
>> msnyder@sonic.net writes:
>>> This patch is to fix a memory leak, but while you're looking at it...
>>> does it seem to you that these two blocks have any effect?
>>>
>>> [Sorry if I posted this before, I've been searching for it...]
>>
>> You did post something very much like this, but I recall that the
>> blocks in question in the older post really didn't have any effect.
>> These at least set funname.
>>
>> I'm kind of surprised that they don't set funname to demangled when
>> it's non-NULL.
>
> OK, how about the patch itself?

So, checking in the patch, ignoring the possibility of dead code.

References:
- [PATCH] stack.c, memory leak (no-effect code?)
  - From: msnyder
- Re: [PATCH] stack.c, memory leak (no-effect code?)
  - From: Jim Blandy
- Re: [PATCH] stack.c, memory leak (no-effect code?)
  - From: msnyder

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]