[PATCH 1/5] hexdump-parse.c: Fix Resource leak (CID #26032)

[Chris Johns]

On 16/3/21 10:07 am, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 6:01 PM Chris Johns <chrisj at rtems.org
> <mailto:chrisj at rtems.org>> wrote:
>     On 16/3/21 6:55 am, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>     >
>     >
>     > On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 2:46 PM Gedare Bloom <gedare at rtems.org
>     <mailto:gedare at rtems.org>
>     > <mailto:gedare at rtems.org <mailto:gedare at rtems.org>>> wrote:
>     >
>     >     On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 8:27 PM Chris Johns <chrisj at rtems.org
>     <mailto:chrisj at rtems.org>
>     >     <mailto:chrisj at rtems.org <mailto:chrisj at rtems.org>>> wrote:
>     >     >
>     >     > On 13/3/21 2:18 am, Ryan Long wrote:
>     >     > > CID 26032: Resource leak in rtems_shell_hexdump_rewrite().
>     >     > >
>     >     > > Closes #4296
>     >     > > ---
>     >     > >  cpukit/libmisc/shell/hexdump-parse.c | 3 +++
>     >     > >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>     >     > >
>     >     > > diff --git a/cpukit/libmisc/shell/hexdump-parse.c
>     >     b/cpukit/libmisc/shell/hexdump-parse.c
>     >     > > index 88b9d56..5b56bbf 100644
>     >     > > --- a/cpukit/libmisc/shell/hexdump-parse.c
>     >     > > +++ b/cpukit/libmisc/shell/hexdump-parse.c
>     >     > > @@ -462,6 +462,9 @@ isint2:                                 
>     >      switch(fu->bcnt) {
>     >     > >               (void)printf("\n");
>     >     > >       }
>     >     > >  #endif
>     >     > > +#ifdef __rtems__
>     >     > > +     free(nextpr);
>     >     > > +#endif
>     >     >
>     >     > I know this has not been done in imported code in rtems.git before but
>     >     should we
>     >     > adopt the libbsd standard of adding /* __rtems__ */ to the #else and
>     #endif?
>     >
>     >     Probably, but we also clone-and-own this shell/ code, and we should
>     >     not bother with these #ifdefs in there. I think I have said this 3
>     >     times this past week about shell/. The upstream does not want our
>     >     changes, and we don't import from them anymore.
>     >
>     > Some of these files have massive changes and some don't. Ryan and 
>     > I looked at main_cp.c and it had at least 40 revisions since the version
>     > we have. The same Coverity issue appeared to be present but the variable
>     > names were changed and much clearer.
> 
>     Yes.
> 
>     > Chris imported this code initially. I'll trust his ruling on this since I
>     assume
>     > he is likely to either be the one to update it eventually or have to help
>     someone
>     > a lot. :)
> 
>     If the code was updated I would use the libbsd way of handing it. It has been
>     proven to work.
> 
>     > And some of it is close enough that the ifdef's are worth it. Some isn't. 
>     > Hard call on the overall value.
> 
>     For the existing code it is hard to call. If I was starting again I would say we
>     had to support a clean separation.
> 
> 
> I assume you would checkout the original version and diff it. But would the
> ifdef rtems ease the burden any?

Yes and a good question, I do not know. I suppose it would depend on the file
and changes.

> I tend to like going with them otherwise, we have some files we do it
> on and others we don't.

This makes sense so if we feel it would help even now lets add them and if we
add then I feel it is only small amount of extra effort to add them in the
libbsd style.

Chris