From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jul 25 15:13:41 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 648AE37B401
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>;
	Fri, 25 Jul 2003 15:13:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from solfertje.student.utwente.nl (solfertje.student.utwente.nl
	[130.89.167.40])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D17E743FA3
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>;
	Fri, 25 Jul 2003 15:13:40 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from dalroi@solfertje.student.utwente.nl)
Received: from solfertje.student.utwente.nl (failways.internal [10.236.150.2])
	by solfertje.student.utwente.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 21516376; Sat, 26 Jul 2003 00:16:44 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2003 00:13:28 +0200 (CEST)
From: Alban Hertroys <dalroi@solfertje.student.utwente.nl>
To: Pete French <pfrench@firstcallgroup.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <E19fgYM-0007SV-00@mailhost.firstcallgroup.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Message-Id: <20030725221644.21516376@solfertje.student.utwente.nl>
cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: malloc does not return null when out of memory
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Alban Hertroys <dalroi@solfertje.student.utwente.nl>
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code
	<freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 22:13:41 -0000

On 24 Jul, Pete French punched keys in this particular order:
> Its not bogus - the trouble is that you cant tell at the time malloc returns
> whether the pointer will be useable or not. You only find that out when
> you try and use it, and whether theres any space or not depends oon what
> else may have munched up (or released) memory between you making the call
> to malloc() and actually writing to the location returned.

This looks similar to the problem with mktemp(). Maybe it is possible to
solve this in a similar way? For example, by allocating memory and
filling it in the same call?

That probably would mean that all the software should switch to a new
way of allocating memory, but it's a start...

-- 

Alban Hertroys                              http://solfertje.student.utwente.nl
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                This person has performed an illegal operation
                and will be shot down.