-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 203
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
ES branch missing coverage in CFE_ES_GenPoolRecyclePoolBlock and CFE_ESGenPoolCreatePoolBlock, NULL pointer check #1930
Labels
Comments
skliper
changed the title
ES branch missing coverage in CFE_ES_GenPoolRecyclePoolBlock, NULL pointer check
ES branch missing coverage in CFE_ES_GenPoolRecyclePoolBlock and CFE_ESGenPoolCreatePoolBlock, NULL pointer check
Sep 5, 2021
avan989
pushed a commit
to avan989/cFE
that referenced
this issue
Jun 14, 2023
update code covearage test for CFE_ES_GenPoolRecyclePoolBlock and CFE_ES_GenPoolCreatePoolBlock for null pointer check.
avan989
pushed a commit
to avan989/cFE
that referenced
this issue
Jun 16, 2023
Fix nasa#1930, add additional coverage test for null pointer check
avan989
pushed a commit
to avan989/cFE
that referenced
this issue
Jun 16, 2023
Add code coverage for null pointer check
avan989
pushed a commit
to avan989/cFE
that referenced
this issue
Jun 16, 2023
Fix nasa#1930, add code coverage for null check in ES
dzbaker
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 23, 2023
Fix #1930, add code coverage for null check
2 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
The NULL pointer check in CFE_ES_GenPoolRecyclePoolBlock would require either exposing this internal routine or getting really lucky corrupting the record from a separate task since it's valid from the calling function.
here:
cFE/modules/es/fsw/src/cfe_es_generic_pool.c
Lines 119 to 120 in e5d4ed9
Same pattern in CFE_ES_GenPoolCreatePoolBlock:
here
cFE/modules/es/fsw/src/cfe_es_generic_pool.c
Lines 180 to 185 in e5d4ed9
Describe the solution you'd like
Questionable usefulness, since it can likely only be hit if a pool without a mutex is shared between tasks and access is not serialized (BAD!). If the check does remain, could just expose the internal function to force the failure.
Describe alternatives you've considered
None
Additional context
None
Requester Info
Jacob Hageman - NASA/GSFC
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: