On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 06:07:08PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> > +/* Replaces 'dst' by 'src', destroying 'src'. The caller must eventually
> > free
> > + * 'dst' with miniflow_destroy(). */
> > +void
> > +miniflow_move(struct miniflow *dst, struct miniflow *src)
> > +{
> > + int n = miniflow_n_values(src);
> > + if (n <= MINI_N_INLINE) {
> > + dst->values = dst->inline_values;
> > + memcpy(dst->values, src->values, n * sizeof *dst->values);
>
> Does this leak memory in the case where miniflow_n_values(dst) >
> MINI_N_INLINE? Later when we destroy dst, we don't know that we
> should be freeing dst->values because dst->values ==
> dst->inline_values. Or, are we assuming that dst hasn't already been
> initialized? In that case I think the function comment on this and
> cls_rule_move() could be expanded.
The latter.
I changed the comment on this function to:
/* Initializes 'dst' with the data in 'src', destroying 'src'.
* The caller must eventually free 'dst' with miniflow_destroy(). */
I also made similar changes to the other new functions. Is that
clearer? I can add another sentence if you do not think so.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
