[torquedev] pbm_mom segfault in TMomCheckJobChild

[Glen Beane]

On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 6:15 PM, Joshua Bernstein
<jbernstein at penguincomputing.com> wrote:
>
>
> Garrick Staples wrote:
>>
>> After investigating both patches yesterday, I have to conclude that
>> neither is
>> of merit.  The close_conn() should never do the right thing, and the usage
>> of
>> '&&' in this context is perfectly valid.
>
> Fair enough. But why is close(i) used there, when apparently in the 2.4.0,
> its been corrected to close_conn()? Further close_conn() is used elsewhere
> in many other similar functions, thus it seems like a valid fix.


I would *not* assume 2.4.0 is correct. The problem with changing it to
close_conn() in this situation is that close_conn WON'T DO ANYTHING
because svr_conn[i].cn_active == Idle when it is called!

    if (svr_conn[i].cn_active != Idle)
        {
        netcounter_incr();

        svr_conn[i].cn_func(i);

        /* NOTE:  breakout if state changed (probably received
shutdown request) */

        if ((SState != NULL) && (OrigState != *SState))
          break;
        }
      else  /* XXXXXXX svr_conn[i].cn_active == Idle !!!! */
        {
        close_conn(i);
        }



void close_conn(

  int sd) /* I */

  {
  if ((sd < 0) || (max_connection <= sd))
    {
    return;
    }

  if (svr_conn[sd].cn_active == Idle)    /* XXXXXXXXXXXXXX LOOK AT ME!
I'm not going to do anything!*/
    {
    return;
    }

  close(sd);