Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:16168 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 69179 invoked by uid 1010); 7 May 2005 15:50:55 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 58876 invoked from network); 7 May 2005 15:33:49 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO gmail.com) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 7 May 2005 15:33:49 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 64.233.184.201 wproxy.gmail.com Linux 2.4/2.6 Received: from ([64.233.184.201:63634] helo=wproxy.gmail.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 1.2 r(5656M)) with SMTP id 51/B1-35155-CDFDC724 for ; Sat, 07 May 2005 11:33:48 -0400 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 57so928361wri for ; Sat, 07 May 2005 08:33:45 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=tAfcb64ISnt98JZg1oi3y3hJnMKfPIbgMeKiIAB6c3xBGh7U0csYRmRnFe+3MLTZP2VX6EmjbrNtgPMkOULDElqyF1zrxONJqTiR+Relk16v1FUH6dzg9e57ULiPKRRqUScl3+Pr9+FYEA/qTqhlLpdW6m4V+FdGTYBMz/QVtpQ= Received: by 10.54.70.2 with SMTP id s2mr1500433wra; Sat, 07 May 2005 08:33:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.77.4 with HTTP; Sat, 7 May 2005 08:33:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4e89b42605050708333a94104a@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 7 May 2005 11:33:43 -0400 Reply-To: Wez Furlong To: PHP Internals Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Subject: unchecked pemalloc() return values From: kingwez@gmail.com (Wez Furlong) I fixed http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=3D32974 this morning, which was the result of 3 things going wrong at once. One of the problems was that the zend_llist functions don't check the return value from pemalloc(). With this particular bug, malloc() would fail, even though it was not a low memory condition, and that would cause a segv when populating the NULL element. I suspect we have a whole bunch of places where we don't check pemalloc() return values; the question is, are we concerned enough about them to add in a NULL check and raise an E_ERROR? --Wez.