[Expat-bugs] [ expat-Bugs-667511 ] additional patch for #618199
SourceForge.net
noreply at sourceforge.net
Tue Jan 14 01:16:37 EST 2003
Bugs item #667511, was opened at 2003-01-13 18:49
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=110127&aid=667511&group_id=10127
Category: None
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Jeremy Kloth (jkloth)
Assigned to: Karl Waclawek (kwaclaw)
Summary: additional patch for #618199
Initial Comment:
The attached patch ensures that localPart will point to TAG.buf
when storeRawNames is called.
There was no need to replace the TAG_NAME.str with the
keyname for the ELEMENT_TYPE hash entry since the pool
takes care of deallocating it (keyname) when the pool is
destroyed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Comment By: Jeremy Kloth (jkloth)
Date: 2003-01-14 02:16
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=38980
Sorry, I cannot trim a problem to a small test case. It seems to
require a certain amount of additional malloc/realloc/free that I
cannot determine. I can say that it only happens when doing multiple
XML_ParseBuffer calls. Eith debug prints I traced the error to where
storeRawNames updates the TAG_NAME.localPart.
The problem is that it should only be updated when localPart points
into tag->buf, which it almost always does. The exception to this is
addressed by my patch. To fix this in storeRawNames would add
overhead that is not required if TAG_NAME.str is not redefined before
TAG_NAME.localPart is defined in storeAtts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Karl Waclawek (kwaclaw)
Date: 2003-01-13 21:05
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=290026
I think you meant to say:
"The attached patch ensures that TAG_NAME.str will point to
TAG.buf when storeRawNames is called."
Your changes make sense to me, but I am not sure
that there is a bug, since TAG_NAME.str doesn't need
to be updated when it does not point to tag->buf.
Is there a specific case where it fails for you?
If yes, would you please give us the details, so that
we can build a regression test for the patch?
Thanks!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Jeremy Kloth (jkloth)
Date: 2003-01-13 19:34
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=38980
Oops...
Here is the attachment again
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Karl Waclawek (kwaclaw)
Date: 2003-01-13 19:06
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=290026
Two things:
- I can't see the attachment
- Does this apply to the current CVS?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=110127&aid=667511&group_id=10127
More information about the Expat-bugs
mailing list