Closed Bug 128560 Opened 22 years ago Closed 22 years ago
Fail when Async Proxy methods are passed out or in-out params
Currently, we don't check method invocations on async proxy objects to see whether out or in-out parameters are being passed. Since such parameters have indeterminate values in the async case, we want to return an explicit error when such parameters are passed to methods through the async proxy.
During converstion from a mini variant to a full variant, we check to see if the paramater is a dipper. If it is, we fail. This will cause the Async call to return an error code and NOT post an event.
Severity: normal → critical
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla1.0
Moving Netscape owned 0.9.9 and 1.0 bugs that don't have an nsbeta1, nsbeta1+, topembed, topembed+, Mozilla0.9.9+ or Mozilla1.0+ keyword. Please send any questions or feedback about this to email@example.com. You can search for "Moving bugs not scheduled for a project" to quickly delete this bugmail.
Target Milestone: mozilla1.0 → mozilla1.2
Comment on attachment 72272 [details] [diff] [review] Fail if we detect a dipper in an async proxy. firstname.lastname@example.org... after changing the NS_ERROR_FAILURE to a more 'proxy specific' failure code. (as dougt and i discussed)
Attachment #72272 - Flags: superreview+
Comment on attachment 72272 [details] [diff] [review] Fail if we detect a dipper in an async proxy. >+ if (mProxyType & PROXY_ASYNC && paramInfo.IsDipper()) Maybe I'm a wimp, but I'd rather see: if ((mProxyType & PROXY_ASYNC) && paramInfo.IsDipper())
Attachment #72272 - Flags: review+
both suggestions added. thanks.
Comment on attachment 72272 [details] [diff] [review] Fail if we detect a dipper in an async proxy. a=asa (on behalf of drivers) for checkin to the 1.0 trunk
Attachment #72272 - Flags: approval+
Checking in src/nsProxyEvent.cpp; /cvsroot/mozilla/xpcom/proxy/src/nsProxyEvent.cpp,v <-- nsProxyEvent.cpp new revision: 1.70; previous revision: 1.69 done Fix checked into trunk. Nisheeth, does this also need to land on any branch??
Looking at 125466, I do not think that this is meant for .99. Marking fixed.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 22 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.