Re: file descripter leak in current with Qmail?

On Mon, 7 Jun 2004, Stefan Ehmann wrote:

> On Mon, 2004-06-07 at 22:38, Robert Watson wrote:
> > On Mon, 7 Jun 2004, Arjan van Leeuwen wrote:
> > > I get a panic (address not allocated) when using the patch. I can't
> > > write down any useful details about it right now, because although the
> > > server has only 3 users, they're very disconcerned when I disrupt their
> > > internet traffic :). 
> > 
> > Doh.  Sorry about that.  Revised patch attached.  I'm able to test the
> > leak with the attached C file, and on my test box (now that it doesn't
> > panic), the leak appears fixed for non-blocking accepts. 
> 
> Thanks, that fixed it here too.

Ok, I've gone ahead and merged the fix.  Thanks for the bug report, and
thanks to Brian for the pointer at the accept() change.  The reason I
became involved in the thread in the first place was that I was worried it
might be something like this, and indeed, it was.  Let me know if you have
any further problems of this sort.  There will probably be some more nits
like this as more locking is merged -- hence merging it in small
functional changes in as much as is possible, allowing each change to
shake out some before the next batch.

Thanks!

Robert N M Watson             FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects
robert_at_fledge.watson.org      Senior Research Scientist, McAfee Research