On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Plüm, Rüdiger, Vodafone Group <[email protected]> wrote: > >> From: Yann Ylavic [mailto:[email protected]] >> >> Also it seems that we leak the hash iterator here (on c->pool). > > Why do we leak here? apr_hash_first(NULL, is used. So no new iterator is > allocated.
Correct, I thought apr_hash_first(NULL, ...) was implicitly using hash->pool to allocate an iterator, but that's not the case (it's a struct member). >> Couldn't we use a (single) linked list for c->filters since >> ap_filter_t already has a 'next' field? So using an apr_hash_t is indeed better. Regards, Yann.
