M. Warner Losh wrote:
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ted Unangst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: aha_isa.c: aha_isa_attach: aha_free free aha, can't use it
: afterwards, lots of examples.
aha_free doesn't actually free the aha, it just tears down the dma for
the device. So the sturct
Julian Elischer wrote:
Ted Unangst wrote:
these are results from running Coverity's analysis over Freebsd 4.10
kernel.
two improper loops:
if_ef.c:566 and atapi-all.c
ng_socket.c: possible double free of resp 815 and 870, depending on
caller context. is this possible?
I'm not seeing it..
Can
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ted Unangst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: M. Warner Losh wrote:
: In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
: Ted Unangst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: : aha_isa.c: aha_isa_attach: aha_free free aha, can't use it
: : afterwards, lots of examples.
:
:
In message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ted Unangst [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: aha_isa.c: aha_isa_attach: aha_free free aha, can't use it
: afterwards, lots of examples.
aha_free doesn't actually free the aha, it just tears down the dma for
the device. So the sturct aha_softc * that's
Ted Unangst wrote:
these are results from running Coverity's analysis over Freebsd 4.10
kernel.
two improper loops:
if_ef.c:566 and atapi-all.c
ng_socket.c: possible double free of resp 815 and 870, depending on
caller context. is this possible?
I'm not seeing it..
Can you show the lines in
these are results from running Coverity's analysis over Freebsd 4.10 kernel.
two improper loops:
if_ef.c:566 and atapi-all.c
ng_socket.c: possible double free of resp 815 and 870, depending on
caller context. is this possible?
if_bfe.c: double call to bfe_release_resources will free lots of
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004, John Baldwin wrote:
On Thursday 19 February 2004 08:43 pm, Ted Unangst wrote:
Hi. These are some bugs found by Coverity in a static analysis run on the
FreeBSD kernel. All these are use after free bugs.
Thanks for the excellent bug reports!
I wonder if the same
I wonder if the same approach relating to memory allocation and free
checking via static analysis could be applied to locking and unlocking of
locks? I.e.:
Yes. See Dawson's papers. That is one of the examples given. Use after free is
one of the stock checkers. I don't think that there is
On Thursday 19 February 2004 08:43 pm, Ted Unangst wrote:
Hi. These are some bugs found by Coverity in a static analysis run on the
FreeBSD kernel. All these are use after free bugs.
Thanks for the excellent bug reports!
--
John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb
At 18:40 20/02/2004, John Baldwin wrote:
On Thursday 19 February 2004 08:43 pm, Ted Unangst wrote:
Hi. These are some bugs found by Coverity in a static analysis run on the
FreeBSD kernel. All these are use after free bugs.
Thanks for the excellent bug reports!
For what it's worth, I've now
Hi. These are some bugs found by Coverity in a static analysis run on the
FreeBSD kernel. All these are use after free bugs.
# New errors.
#
-
[UNINSPECTED]
X [BUG]
X [FALSE]
X
11 matches
Mail list logo