On 11/02/11 01:25, NeilBrown wrote:

Thanks Jes.
I've applied all of these - using the second version of patch 19.

I'm not normally very fussed about freeing and closing things shortly before
the process is going to exit anyway, but I'm not against it.  And some of
your patches were for other leaks.

Hi Neil,

I totally agree here. The main reason for applying those fixes is to
reduce the S/N ratio from the checking tools.

With my latest with these patches applied run I got about 65 warnings
whereas I am getting around 105 in the version of mdadm that is in
Fedora 16. Some of these are definitely false positives, but I have
another set of patches with real fixes coming your way shortly.

quoted

This is the bulk of these for now. Please notice that I haven't
touched super-ddf.c at all, and that is probably the single biggest
offender. Also note that I haven't addressed a number of warnings in
sysfs.c where we know for sure that files aren't bigger than a given
size. The tool obviously doesn't know this, so it spews warnings when
we strcpy() content we just read. While the code per-ce is probably
safe, we may want to switch to strncpy() just to reduce the noise
ratio?

Maybe.  I hate strncpy because it doesn't reliably nul-terminate but I'm
happy to make the code 'safer' as long as we avoid making it ugly.

I couldn't agree more - it is such a mess :(

Cheers,
Jes