From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtpng3.m.smailru.net (smtpng3.m.smailru.net [94.100.177.149]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1968646970E for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2020 13:33:00 +0300 (MSK) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 13:32:58 +0300 From: Nikita Pettik Message-ID: <20200121103258.GG82780@tarantool.org> References: <591f17842bd4138b5598d6d69822195daef63375.1579541242.git.i.kosarev@tarantool.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <591f17842bd4138b5598d6d69822195daef63375.1579541242.git.i.kosarev@tarantool.org> Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v3 1/2] b-tree: return NULL on matras_alloc fail List-Id: Tarantool development patches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Ilya Kosarev Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org, v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org On 20 Jan 21:13, Ilya Kosarev wrote: > In bps_tree_create_leaf we use matras_alloc in case > bps_tree_garbage_pop didn't work out. However it also might not > succeed. Then we need to return NULL instead of dereferencing NULL > pointer. > > Part of #3807 > --- > src/lib/salad/bps_tree.h | 7 +++++-- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/lib/salad/bps_tree.h b/src/lib/salad/bps_tree.h > index d28b53f53..a10f0a32c 100644 > --- a/src/lib/salad/bps_tree.h > +++ b/src/lib/salad/bps_tree.h > @@ -2147,8 +2147,11 @@ bps_tree_create_leaf(struct bps_tree *tree, bps_tree_block_id_t *id) > { What about bps_tree_create_inner()? It follows the same allocation pattern. Doesn't it require same NULL check? What is more, result of bps_tree_create_leaf() invokation is not checked in bps_tree_process_insert_leaf(). > struct bps_leaf *res = (struct bps_leaf *) > bps_tree_garbage_pop(tree, id); > - if (!res) > - res = (struct bps_leaf *)matras_alloc(&tree->matras, id); > + if (res == NULL) { Nit: personally I wouldn't strive to fix codestyle in this place since all bps_tree.h code follows the same (even if a bit different) codestyle. So now code being fixed looks a bit strange (IMHO). > + res = (struct bps_leaf *) matras_alloc(&tree->matras, id); > + if (res == NULL) > + return NULL; > + } > res->header.type = BPS_TREE_BT_LEAF; > tree->leaf_count++; > return res; > -- > 2.17.1 >