The recv_reply() function was referencing host->ai in a freeaddrinfo(3)
call after it had freed @host.
This is not likely to be harmful in a single-threaded user context,
but it's still bad form, and it will get called out if testing
sm-notify with poisoned free memory. The less noise, the better we
are able to see real problems.
Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Steve Dickson <steved@redhat.com>
return ai;
}
+static void smn_forget_host(struct nsm_host *host)
+{
+ unlink(host->path);
+ free(host->path);
+ free(host->name);
+ if (host->ai)
+ freeaddrinfo(host->ai);
+
+ free(host);
+}
+
int
main(int argc, char **argv)
{
hp = hosts;
hosts = hp->next;
- if (notify_host(sock, hp)){
- unlink(hp->path);
- free(hp->name);
- free(hp->path);
- free(hp);
+ if (notify_host(sock, hp))
continue;
- }
/* Set the timeout for this call, using an
exponential timeout strategy */
nsm_log(LOG_WARNING,
"%s doesn't seem to be a valid address,"
" skipped", host->name);
+ smn_forget_host(host);
return 1;
}
}
if (p <= end) {
nsm_log(LOG_DEBUG, "Host %s notified successfully",
hp->name);
- unlink(hp->path);
- free(hp->name);
- free(hp->path);
- free(hp);
- freeaddrinfo(hp->ai);
+ smn_forget_host(hp);
return;
}
}