Re: modutils-2.3.15 'insmod'

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

Followup to:  <jer84zln59.fsf@sykes.suse.de>
By author:    Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> "Richard B. Johnson" <root@chaos.analogic.com> writes:
> 
> |> It is likely that malloc(0) returning a valid pointer is a bug
> |> that has prevented this problem from being observed.
> 
> It's not a bug, it's a behaviour explicitly allowed by the C standard.
> 

The bug is in xmalloc, meaning that it assumes that returning NULL is
always an error.  Presumably xmalloc should look *either* like:

void *xmalloc(size_t s)
{
	void *p = malloc(s);
	
	if ( !p && s )
		barf();
	else
		return p;
}

... or ...

void *xmalloc(size_t s)
{
	void *p;

	/* Always return a valid allocation */
	if ( s == 0 ) s = 1;
	p = malloc(s);
	
	if ( !p )
		barf();
	else
		return p;
}
-- 
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
Architectures needed: ia64 m68k mips64 ppc ppc64 s390 s390x sh v850 x86-64