Skip Menu |
Report information
The Basics
Id: 46709
Status: resolved
Priority: 0/
Queue: bind9-public

People
Owner: Nobody in particular
Requestors: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
Cc:
AdminCc:

Bug Information
Version Fixed: 9.9.12, 9.9.12(sub), 9.10.7, 9.10.7(sub), 9.11.3, 9.12.0
Version Found: (no value)
Versions Affected: (no value)
Versions Planned: (no value)
Priority: P2 Normal
Severity: S2 Normal
CVSS Score: (no value)
CVE ID: (no value)
Component: (no value)
Area: bug

Dates
Created:Mon, 27 Nov 2017 19:39:27 +0000
Updated:Mon, 14 Jan 2019 14:14:15 +0000
Closed:Tue, 28 Nov 2017 11:39:49 +0000



Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 09:39:27 -1000
To: bind9-public@isc.org
From: marka@isc.org
Subject: isc_heap_delete not clearing index value
If isc_heap_delete is called with a heap that updates the index value it should set the index value of the deleted entry to zero.
ready for review
To: "Mark Andrews via RT" <bind9-public@isc.org>
From: "Mukund Sivaraman" <muks@isc.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 12:34:46 +0530
Subject: Re: [ISC-Bugs #46709] isc_heap_delete not clearing index value
Now that isc_heap_delete() calls ->index(), is the change to rbtdb.c @@ setsigningtime() still required? The change to isc_heap_delete() and testcase looks ok. In the testcase, I'd assert e1.index != 0 in the first case as asserting index 1 looks for implementation detail. But that's just IMO.. it look fine other than that. Mukund
From: "Mark Andrews" <marka@isc.org>
To: bind9-public@isc.org
Subject: Re: [ISC-Bugs #46709] isc_heap_delete not clearing index value
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 18:38:05 +1100
> On 28 Nov 2017, at 6:05 pm, Mukund Sivaraman via RT <bind9-public@isc.org> wrote: > > Now that isc_heap_delete() calls ->index(), is the change to rbtdb.c @@ > setsigningtime() still required? No. Changing that is followup work. > The change to isc_heap_delete() and testcase looks ok. In the testcase, > I'd assert e1.index != 0 in the first case as asserting index 1 looks > for implementation detail. But that's just IMO.. it look fine other than > that. > > Mukund > > > > -- > Ticket History: https://bugs.isc.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=46709 -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
What's the impact of this one on functionality/behaviour of BIND?
From: "Mark Andrews" <marka@isc.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 18:43:37 +1100
To: bind9-public@isc.org
Subject: Re: [ISC-Bugs #46709] isc_heap_delete not clearing index value
> On 28 Nov 2017, at 6:39 pm, Cathy Almond via RT <bind9-public@isc.org> wrote: > > What's the impact of this one on functionality/behaviour of BIND? Nothing as the code works around it at present. It’s just inconsistent behaviour in that every other operation updates the index when there is a callback specified. -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
4829. [bug] isc_heap_delete did not zero the index value when the heap was created with a callback to do that. [RT #46709]