diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | ChangeLog | 5 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | Src/mem.c | 18 |
2 files changed, 22 insertions, 1 deletions
@@ -1,3 +1,8 @@ +2007-04-30 Peter Stephenson <pws@csr.com> + + * 23339: Src/mem.c: make malloc(0) allocate a single byte + instead of returning invalid (and unfreeable) memory. + 2007-04-27 Peter Stephenson <pws@csr.com> * 23337: Src/Zle/compctl.c: argument to stat() wasn't @@ -830,10 +830,26 @@ malloc(MALLOC_ARG_T size) #endif /* some systems want malloc to return the highest valid address plus one - if it is called with an argument of zero */ + if it is called with an argument of zero. + + TODO: really? Suppose we allocate more memory, so + that this is now in bounds, then a more rational application + that thinks it can free() anything it malloc'ed, even + of zero length, calls free for it? Aren't we in big + trouble? Wouldn't it be safer just to allocate some + memory anyway? + + If the above comment is really correct, then at least + we need to check in free() if we're freeing memory + at m_high. + */ if (!size) +#if 1 + size = 1; +#else return (MALLOC_RET_T) m_high; +#endif queue_signals(); /* just queue signals rather than handling them */ |