Re: Incorrect allocation handling for cryptohash functions with OpenSSL
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Incorrect allocation handling for cryptohash functions with OpenSSL |
Дата | |
Msg-id | a0b54087-dd11-d9ea-5e86-3fa478ab341c@iki.fi обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Incorrect allocation handling for cryptohash functions with OpenSSL (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: Incorrect allocation handling for cryptohash functions with OpenSSL
Re: Incorrect allocation handling for cryptohash functions with OpenSSL |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 18/12/2020 09:35, Michael Paquier wrote: > Hi all, > > As of the work done in 87ae9691, I have played with error injections > in the code paths using this code, but forgot to count for cases where > cascading resowner cleanups are involved. Like other resources (JIT, > DSM, etc.), this requires an allocation in TopMemoryContext to make > sure that nothing gets forgotten or cleaned up on the way until the > resowner that did the cryptohash allocation is handled. > > Attached is a small extension I have played with by doing some error > injections, and a patch. If there are no objections, I would like to > commit this fix. pg_cryptohash_create() is now susceptible to leaking memory in TopMemoryContext, if the allocations fail. I think the attached should fix it (but I haven't tested it at all). BTW, looking at pg_cryptohash_ctx and pg_cryptohash_state, why do we need two structs? They're both allocated and controlled by the cryptohash implementation. It would seem simpler to have just one. - Heikki
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: