fix: gumbo memory leak on abandoned tags #3036
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
minitest-parallel_fork creates new runner processes, so the constant created using Process.pid is out of date.
found by the fuzzer
Merged
|
I'm a little surprised this bug is there. It must have been introduced after the last time I fuzzed nokogumbo. I appreciate the work @fuzzy-boiii23a has done here. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What problem is this PR intended to solve?
The fuzzer in #3007 found a memory leak when incomplete tags are encountered.
The repro added to the memory leak test suite is:
which will leak the tag name without this fix.
cc @stevecheckoway
Have you included adequate test coverage?
Yes, but added it to the memory leak suite which can only be run manually today (see #1603 for context on plans to improve it).
Does this change affect the behavior of either the C or the Java implementations?
No functional change.