[PATCH wayland v4 08/11] client: Replace the singleton zombie with bespoke zombies

[Daniel Stone]

Hi all,

On 11 January 2018 at 15:44, Daniel Stone <daniel at fooishbar.org> wrote:
> On 10 January 2018 at 17:47, Simon McVittie <smcv at collabora.com> wrote:
>> I ask because the original authors of libdbus wrote it thinking that
>> they had handled OOM conditions, at significant complexity cost,
>> then later added infrastructure to simulate malloc() failures during
>> automated testing and discovered that a significant fraction of them
>> were mishandled (Havoc estimates "at least 5%" in [1]). Next month that
>> test infrastructure will be 15 years old, and I'm *still* semi-regularly
>> finding bugs in pre-existing code where malloc() failures are mishandled.
>
> I would agree with this. I've got a lot of trouble imagining the exact
> scenario where malloc fails for our new zombie object during
> destruction and then succeeds for the wl_closure allocation when we
> next demarshal a message. I'd be inclined to keep this patch as-is.

Pekka somewhat agreed on IRC, and ultimately I went ahead and just
landed things as-is last night. Thanks all!

Cheers,
Daniel