On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 20:13:26 GMT, Alexey Ivanov <aiva...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> By the above statement are you referring to the lines 336 to 341? I'll admit >> I'm a little lost for this one > > I'll submit a new bug to address this problem. > > It's not just a matter of an unused variables, it's the logic error: if the > buffer is too small, *a new buffer is allocated*, yet this new buffer isn't > deleted afterwards, nor is used to read the value retrieved from the registry. I submitted [JDK-8348872](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8348872): _jabswitch.cpp: regEnable and regDeleteValue leak reallocated data buffer_ ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21656#discussion_r1932597632
