LDB hidden memory leaks
kamenim at gmail.com
Fri Jul 16 04:18:14 MDT 2010
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 07:47, <tridge at samba.org> wrote:
> Hi Kamen,
> Andrew and I looked at your ldb talloc changes, and they look good
> except for two little things:
> 1) you put the talloc context as the 3rd argument in the new
> functions. The convention we have used (almost) everywhere in Samba
> is that the first argument is the main context structure, and the 2nd
> argument is the talloc context for the result. Other arguments follow
> those. I think making these functions put the talloc context 3rd may
> lead to more typos in future (as TALLOC_CTX is a void, we get no type
> checking on this, so conventions are all we have).
> 2) the (TALLOC_CTX *) cast also goes against our established
> convention. If we were to move to doing that, I think it may be
> better to use something like:
> #define TC(x) x
> and use TC(ptr) as a visual marker.
> Don't do that now though - if we decide to adopt TALLOC_CTX casting,
> let's do it as a separate patch.
> Note that we do have some functions in ldb that don't follow the
> "context then TALLOC_CTX then args" convention (eg. some ldb_dn
> functions), but I don't think we have any with TALLOC_CTX 3rd. So
> while we haven't been entirely consistent, introducing a 3rd varient
> on argument ordering is asking for trouble :-)
> Cheers, Tridge
Actually, those two things are that little :)
As the driving force for this patch was "making better interfaces" those
two things are a big part of what I was trying to start.
1) pass TALLOC_CTX explicitly as func parameter - so it is clear who
the owner of the memory is
2) make func prototype (input params, mem context, output params) form
in public functions. Basically "output params are last" rule.
I started this as I was quite confused to read code like this:
ret = ldb_do_something(ldb, ldb, value, msg) - looks kind of strange :)
3) explicitly cast the pointer used as memory context to TALLOC_CTX
in callers - so it is instantly visible which is memory context.
This kind of solves 2).
I was kind of hopping that either 2) or 3) will be accepted - so I put
both ready to sacrifice on of them :). Refusing both of them doesn't make
me that happy with my patch actually.
And while 2) is matter of taste, 3) is a real development aid, so I want to
appeal to the team to consider adopting some kind of visual markers
for memory contexts in the future.
The proposal you gave is definitely a better one than plain casts.
Anyway, I will fix the ldb-mem-fix branch shorty.
As a final note:
I think that aids like this will give novice samba developers (like me)
an easier start. We need more developers and I seriously doubt
those new guys will be "10 years of experience in open source"
type of people :)
Samba Team http://samba.org
More information about the samba-technical