Compiz

Merge lp://qastaging/~mc-return/compiz/compiz.merge-fix-memory-leak-in-decorator into lp://qastaging/compiz/0.9.9

  1. compiz.merge-fix-memory-leak-in-decorator
  2. Merge into 0.9.9
Proposed by MC Return
Status: Merged
Approved by: Daniel van Vugt
Approved revision: 3455
Merged at revision: 3460
Proposed branch: lp://qastaging/~mc-return/compiz/compiz.merge-fix-memory-leak-in-decorator
Merge into: lp://qastaging/compiz/0.9.9
Diff against target: 14 lines (+3/-0)
1 file modified
gtk/window-decorator/decorator.c (+3/-0)
To merge this branch: bzr merge lp://qastaging/~mc-return/compiz/compiz.merge-fix-memory-leak-in-decorator
Reviewer Review Type Date Requested Status
Daniel van Vugt Approve
MC Return Needs Resubmitting
Sam Spilsbury Approve
PS Jenkins bot continuous-integration Pending
Review via email: mp+133423@code.qastaging.launchpad.net

Commit message

Hopefully fixed a memory leak in void update_frames_shadows (gpointer key, gpointer value, gpointer user_data).
The pointer *opts allocates a memory block and stores the adress, but if the pointer *info fails later this memory does not get freed.
Solution: Free and NULL opts, if (!info) also.

(LP: #1033879)

To post a comment you must log in.
Revision history for this message
Sam Spilsbury (smspillaz) wrote :

9 + {
10 + free (opts);
11 + opts = NULL;
12 + return;
13 + }

Good, just change the indentation of { } to align with the if () and remove the redundant opts = NULL;

lp://qastaging/~mc-return/compiz/compiz.merge-fix-memory-leak-in-decorator updated
3455. By MC Return

Fixed indentation and removed the redundant opts = NULL;

Revision history for this message
MC Return (mc-return) wrote :

> Good, just change the indentation of { } to align with the if () and remove
> the redundant opts = NULL;

Thanks for the fast review. :)
Done in r3455.

Revision history for this message
Sam Spilsbury (smspillaz) :
review: Approve
Revision history for this message
Daniel van Vugt (vanvugt) wrote :

One branch/proposal per bug please. It gets too confusing for Launchpad when there are multiple branches to fix a single bug.

review: Needs Resubmitting
Revision history for this message
MC Return (mc-return) wrote :

> One branch/proposal per bug please. It gets too confusing for Launchpad when
> there are multiple branches to fix a single bug.

This one is for the memory leak bug in the decorator only now.

review: Needs Resubmitting
Revision history for this message
Daniel van Vugt (vanvugt) wrote :

Simple, perfect.

review: Approve

Preview Diff

[H/L] Next/Prev Comment, [J/K] Next/Prev File, [N/P] Next/Prev Hunk
The diff is not available at this time. You can reload the page or download it.

Subscribers

People subscribed via source and target branches