Re: introduce dynamic shared memory registry

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)toroid(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: introduce dynamic shared memory registry
Date: 2024-01-21 16:21:46
Message-ID: 3348869.1705854106@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Committed. Thanks everyone for reviewing!

Coverity complained about this:

*** CID 1586660: Null pointer dereferences (NULL_RETURNS)
/srv/coverity/git/pgsql-git/postgresql/src/backend/storage/ipc/dsm_registry.c: 185 in GetNamedDSMSegment()
179 }
180 else if (!dsm_find_mapping(entry->handle))
181 {
182 /* Attach to existing segment. */
183 dsm_segment *seg = dsm_attach(entry->handle);
184
>>> CID 1586660: Null pointer dereferences (NULL_RETURNS)
>>> Dereferencing a pointer that might be "NULL" "seg" when calling "dsm_pin_mapping".
185 dsm_pin_mapping(seg);
186 ret = dsm_segment_address(seg);
187 }
188 else
189 {
190 /* Return address of an already-attached segment. */

I think it's right --- the comments for dsm_attach explicitly
point out that a NULL return is possible. You need to handle
that scenario in some way other than SIGSEGV.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Yoni Sade 2024-01-21 18:07:42 FEATURE REQUEST: Role vCPU limit/priority
Previous Message David E. Wheeler 2024-01-21 15:16:56 Re: Patch: Improve Boolean Predicate JSON Path Docs