Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 8 Jun 2001 06:55:50 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com>
To:        jhb@FreeBSD.ORG, roam@orbitel.bg
Cc:        hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: free() and const warnings
Message-ID:  <200106081055.GAA49069@lakes.dignus.com>
In-Reply-To: <20010608114957.C19938@ringworld.oblivion.bg>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Pentchev <roam@orbitel.bg> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 10:20:51AM -0700, John Baldwin wrote:
> > 
> > On 07-Jun-01 Peter Pentchev wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 07:07:22PM +0300, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >> 
> > >> Is free((void *) (size_t) ptr) the only way to free a const whatever *ptr
> > >> with WARNS=2?  (or more specifically, with -Wcast-qual)
> > > 
> > > Uhm.  OK.  So size_t may not be enough to hold a pointer.  What is it then -
> > > caddr_t?
> > 
> > uintptr_t for data pointers.  In theory I think code pointers may not fit in a
> > uintptr_t.
> > 
> > free((void *)(uintptr_t)ptr) should work.
> > 
> > Of course, this begs the question of why you are free'ing a const. :)
> 
> OK, here's a scenario:
> 
> struct validation_fun {
> 	const char	*name;
> 	valfun		*fun;
> 	int		dyn;
> };
> 
> This is a structure for a set of validation functions, referenced by
> name from another type of object.  There are some predefined functions,
> present in the code at compile-time, and hardcoded in an array, with
> names given as "strings".  Thus, the 'const'.
> 
> However, some of the functions may be defined at runtime, with both
> name and code sent by a server.  In that case, the name is a dynamically
> allocated char *, which needs to be freed upon cleanup.  So I have:
> 
> [cleanup function]
> 	...
> 	if (val->dyn)
> 		free(val->name);
> 
> Any suggestions on how to improve the design to avoid this, if possible,
> would be greatly welcome.
> 
> G'luck,
> Peter

 Since some strings are non-constant (the are allocated) - I believe
 the `const' qualifier in the structure declaration is incorrect.

 What happens if you simply don't have it in the structure declaration?

	- Dave Rivers -

--
rivers@dignus.com                        Work: (919) 676-0847
Get your mainframe programming tools at http://www.dignus.com



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200106081055.GAA49069>