Fix potential object lifetime issue in DSCView#8297
Merged
Conversation
fuzyll
force-pushed
the
test_fix_dsc_lifetime_issue
branch
from
003e938 to
170b180
Compare
fuzyll
force-pushed
the
test_fix_dsc_lifetime_issue
branch
from
170b180 to
c33abca
Compare
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
While I was reviewing #8277, I got suspicious of some places where we were capturing
this. It's late and I might be wrong, but I think there's a potential lifetime issue here.I believe the following sequence is theoretically possible:
DSCTriageView::loadImagesWithAddr()starts a background taskthisDSCTriageViewis destructed (or at least starts to be)this->m_dataIf 5 gets far enough before 6 happens, I think that could be a use-after-free? I also just think it's weird to have a background worker thread have a raw pointer to a UI object.
My change here is to just take a reference to the BV outside of the worker, rather than relying on the UI object. I think this should be the right move, but someone can let me know.