Fixed assertion checking wrong ptr #54
Open
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
I've been hit with this assertion when using lwip in esphome (libretiny fork) with assertions enabled. ``` ASSERT "invalid next ptr" - /config/.esphome/platformio/packages/library-lwip@src-c718385076ab23087e1f617d7cb3e11a/src/core/mem.c:790 ``` I don't fully grasp what's happening here, apart that its some memory chunks optimizations/defragmentation stuff. But I "smell" the assertion checks the wrong pointer. This whole code block it seems to be mostly about mem2, also mem->next is reassigned anyway in the line 755... It seems to be a very rare case (when we're at the end of heap, correct?), so I recon nobody has yet found this.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I've been hit with this assertion when using lwip in esphome (libretiny fork) with assertions enabled.
I don't fully grasp what's happening here, apart that its some memory chunks optimizations/defragmentation stuff. But I "smell" the assertion checks the wrong pointer. This whole code block it seems to be mostly about mem2, also mem->next is reassigned anyway in the line 755...
It seems to be a very rare case (when we're at the end of heap, correct?), so I recon nobody has yet found this.