Hi Jonas,
On 04/14/2017 04:36 PM, Jonas Bonn wrote:
---
drivers/qmimodem/gprs.c | 5 ++---
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/qmimodem/gprs.c b/drivers/qmimodem/gprs.c
index 05ad4bd..404c975 100644
--- a/drivers/qmimodem/gprs.c
+++ b/drivers/qmimodem/gprs.c
@@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ static void qmi_set_attached(struct ofono_gprs *gprs, int
attached,
ofono_gprs_cb_t cb, void *user_data)
{
struct gprs_data *data = ofono_gprs_get_data(gprs);
- struct cb_data *cbd = cb_data_new(cb, user_data);
+ struct cb_data *cbd;
struct qmi_param *param;
uint8_t action;
@@ -109,6 +109,7 @@ static void qmi_set_attached(struct ofono_gprs *gprs, int
attached,
if (!param)
goto error;
+ cbd = cb_data_new(cb, user_data);
if (qmi_service_send(data->nas, QMI_NAS_ATTACH_DETACH, param,
attach_detach_cb, cbd, g_free) > 0)
return;
So cbd is not freed if qmi_service_send fails. So you are introducing a
leak on the fail path.
@@ -117,8 +118,6 @@ static void qmi_set_attached(struct ofono_gprs *gprs, int
attached,
error:
CALLBACK_WITH_FAILURE(cb, cbd->data);
-
- g_free(cbd);
}
static void get_ss_info_cb(struct qmi_result *result, void *user_data)
This entire patch seems unnecessary? The code looks fine as is. Or am
I missing something?
Regards,
-Denis
_______________________________________________
ofono mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ofono.org/mailman/listinfo/ofono
