[Evan Huus <eapache@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 5:28 AM, Jakub Zawadzki <darkjames-ws@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 10:23:32PM -0500, Evan Huus wrote:
> Is the needed scope for these addresses well defined?

epan_dissect_init(edt) ... epan_dissect_cleanup(edt)

It's still old (22/10/2012), not fixed problem: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev/201210/msg00189.html

Right, it is the same as that one. 

I'm starting to think we tightened the scope of ep memory too much. I do think that freeing it at the beginning of epan_dissect_run was wrong, but I'm starting to wonder if the right place for it isn't in epan_dissect_run at all (beginning or end) but is in epan_dissect_cleanup instead. As a bonus I believe this may let us get rid of the epan_dissect_run_with_taps function?

I've run under valgrind with the attached patch and r46320 reverted, and didn't see any errors, which is promising.

Attachment: ep_scope.patch
Description: Binary data