Bug 45908
| Summary: | dmalloc needs fix for strdup as macro | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Retired] Red Hat Raw Hide | Reporter: | Jeff Johnson <jbj> |
| Component: | dmalloc | Assignee: | Jakub Jelinek <jakub> |
| Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | 1.0 | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | i386 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2005-07-19 14:33:19 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
The best solution is that dmalloc intercepts __strdup() as well as strdup(). glibc is allowed to do this by all standards. dmalloc has been removed in FC4. |
From the dmalloc mailing list: I ran into problems with dmalloc 4.8.2 and strdup. Specifically, on my system (a Red Hat Linux system), strdup() becomes a very complex macro, that can either resolve into a call to malloc/memcpy or into a call to __strdup. The full macro looks like this: # define __strdup(s) \ (__extension__ (__builtin_constant_p (s) && __string2_1bptr_p (s) \ ? (((__const char *) (s))[0] == '\0' \ ? (char *) calloc (1, 1) \ : ({ size_t __len = strlen (s) + 1; \ char *__retval = (char *) malloc (__len); \ if (__retval != NULL) \ __retval = (char *) memcpy (__retval, s, __len); \ __retval; })) \ : __strdup (s))) Now, the configure test determines that strdup is a macro, and turns on DMALLOC_STRDUP_MACRO. This basically means that in the case that we call __strdup, we lose the memory allocation, and all subsequent free calls appear as errors. Turning off DMALLOC_STRDUP_MACRO manually causes compilation errors (when we prototype strdup). So, I guess the question is, how best to fix this? The approach I'm planning on is to turn on __NO_STRING_INLINES in my configure script (when dmalloc is selected), which disables this behaviour in bits/string2.h. Anyone have a better idea?