Issue #15116 has been updated by jaruga (Jun Aruga). Thank you for checking my code! > > Fix leaked handle variable "n" in process.c. > > If n is 0..2, dup2 to the same fd does nothing, and n must not be closed. About above thing, I compared process.c#rb_daemon with pty.c#chfunc . Similar implementation, but a little different. https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/trunk/ext/pty/pty.c#L130-L146 In the case of `pty.c`, the "leaked handle" was not detected for the return value of `rb_cloexec_open`. even when `close` function can be executed for for the return value "slave" (= file descriptor) == 0, 1 or 2. In `process.c`, when the return value n < 0, is it no problem? ---------------------------------------- Bug #15116: Fixing issues detected by an Analysis tool. https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/15116#change-74069 * Author: jaruga (Jun Aruga) * Status: Closed * Priority: Normal * Assignee: * Target version: * ruby -v: * Backport: 2.3: UNKNOWN, 2.4: UNKNOWN, 2.5: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- When running a code analysis tool including several sub tools (mainly Coverty [1]), some issues were detected by it. You can refer attached issues_report.txt for detail. Some issues in the issues_report.txt might be false positive. (Those might be wrongly detected.) I tried to fix those by below 2 pull-requests. https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/1956 https://github.com/ruby/net-telnet/pull/15 The summary is * Fix leaked storage in addr2line.c. * Fix passing freed pointer as an argument in gc.c. * Fix leaked handle variable "n" in process.c. * Fix for "top_root" leaking the resource. After above patches, the issues were not detected. But I need your help to check if my code is valid. Thank you. [1] https://scan.coverity.com/ ---Files-------------------------------- issues_report.txt (7.74 KB) -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request / ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe> <http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>