Bug 8235

Summary:	fix possible crashes + memory leak in dbus-gproxy.c
Product:	dbus	Reporter:	Kimmo Hämäläinen <kimmo.hamalainen>
Component:	GLib	Assignee:	Rob Taylor <rob.taylor>
Status:	RESOLVED FIXED	QA Contact:	John (J5) Palmieri <johnp>
Severity:	normal
Priority:	high	CC:	otaylor
Version:	unspecified	Keywords:	patch
Hardware:	x86 (IA32)
OS:	Linux (All)
Whiteboard:
i915 platform:		i915 features:
Attachments:	proposed patch proposed patch proposed patch

Description Kimmo Hämäläinen 2006-09-12 04:55:30 UTC

Here is a patch that works against dbus-glib-0.71. It adds missing checks to
dbus-gproxy.c because it assumes too much about received NameOwnerChanged signals.

Also one memory leak patch that came from you guys, I think...

Comment 1 Kimmo Hämäläinen 2006-09-12 04:56:00 UTC

Created attachment 6920 [details] [review]
proposed patch

Comment 2 Kimmo Hämäläinen 2006-10-12 00:26:41 UTC

Comment on attachment 6920 [details] [review]
proposed patch

This turned out to be a buggy patch. I'll attach a new one when it's been
tested.

Comment 3 Kimmo Hämäläinen 2006-10-13 03:17:06 UTC

Created attachment 7401 [details] [review]
proposed patch

Here is the tested, fixed patch.

Comment 4 Rob Taylor 2006-10-25 13:31:12 UTC

I'd like to look into the 'neater' option mentioned in the patch.

Comment 5 Kimmo Hämäläinen 2006-11-03 05:26:42 UTC

It seems that unassociate_proxies() should also remove the proxy from the proxy
list before adding it to the data->destroyed list, because the caller destroys
the proxy.

Comment 6 Kimmo Hämäläinen 2006-11-16 02:41:55 UTC

Created attachment 7809 [details] [review]
proposed patch

Here is a modified patch that applies against 0.72.

Comment 7 Matthias Clasen 2006-11-28 09:21:33 UTC

Don't you want to create a new info in the else part ?

Comment 8 Ray Strode [halfline] 2006-11-28 09:25:54 UTC

Red Hat downstream report:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216034

Comment 9 Matthias Clasen 2006-11-28 09:32:01 UTC

The RH bug has my alternative patch

Comment 10 Kimmo Hämäläinen 2006-11-29 00:28:12 UTC

(In reply to comment #7)
> Don't you want to create a new info in the else part ?

I'm not sure, because of the comment "Name owner changed or deleted" in the
code: if the info was not found, doesn't that mean that there was not changing
or deletion? I.e. If the info is not found, the name owner is not related to
GProxies. Or am I confused?

Comment 11 Owen Taylor 2006-12-06 12:47:05 UTC

Just wanted to note here that this is regularly crashing gnome-session,
since it blanket listens to all NameOwnerChanged signals; I don't see
a GNOME bugzilla issue for this, but there are probably some dups there
if you looked hard enough.

I think that Kimmo is right and you don't want to insert a new info 
object, the message was simply not related to any GProxy objects that
the library was tracking.

Comment 12 Rob Taylor 2006-12-08 05:35:19 UTC

Yep, that patch looks right to me, I'll prep a release with it in asap.

Comment 13 Rob Taylor 2007-02-08 18:07:38 UTC

Fixed in git head, will be in dbus-glib 0.73

Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.