node-api: fix immediate napi_remove_wrap test - #45406
Merged
nodejs-github-bot merged 1 commit intoNov 18, 2022
Merged
Conversation
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
Sorry, something went wrong.
As documented in napi_wrap section, the returned reference must be deleted with `napi_delete_reference` in response to the finalize callback, in which `napi_unwrap` and `napi_remove_wrap` is not available. When the reference needs to be deleted early, it should be deleted after the wrapped value is not accessed with `napi_unwrap` and `napi_remove_wrap` too. This test is previously added in response to duplicating the test https://github.com/nodejs/node-addon-api/blob/main/test/objectwrap_constructor_exception.cc in the node-addon-api. As Napi::ObjectWrap<> is a subclass of Napi::Reference<>, napi_remove_wrap in the destructor of Napi::ObjectWrap<> is called before napi_delete_reference in the destructor of Napi::Reference<>.
cjihrig
approved these changes
Nov 10, 2022
KevinEady
approved these changes
Nov 11, 2022
KevinEady
left a comment
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM
Sorry, something went wrong.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator
Sorry, something went wrong.
mhdawson
approved these changes
Nov 15, 2022
mhdawson
left a comment
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM
Sorry, something went wrong.
ruyadorno
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 21, 2022
As documented in napi_wrap section, the returned reference must be deleted with `napi_delete_reference` in response to the finalize callback, in which `napi_unwrap` and `napi_remove_wrap` is not available. When the reference needs to be deleted early, it should be deleted after the wrapped value is not accessed with `napi_unwrap` and `napi_remove_wrap` too. This test is previously added in response to duplicating the test https://github.com/nodejs/node-addon-api/blob/main/test/objectwrap_constructor_exception.cc in the node-addon-api. As Napi::ObjectWrap<> is a subclass of Napi::Reference<>, napi_remove_wrap in the destructor of Napi::ObjectWrap<> is called before napi_delete_reference in the destructor of Napi::Reference<>. PR-URL: #45406 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <midawson@redhat.com>
Merged
danielleadams
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 30, 2022
As documented in napi_wrap section, the returned reference must be deleted with `napi_delete_reference` in response to the finalize callback, in which `napi_unwrap` and `napi_remove_wrap` is not available. When the reference needs to be deleted early, it should be deleted after the wrapped value is not accessed with `napi_unwrap` and `napi_remove_wrap` too. This test is previously added in response to duplicating the test https://github.com/nodejs/node-addon-api/blob/main/test/objectwrap_constructor_exception.cc in the node-addon-api. As Napi::ObjectWrap<> is a subclass of Napi::Reference<>, napi_remove_wrap in the destructor of Napi::ObjectWrap<> is called before napi_delete_reference in the destructor of Napi::Reference<>. PR-URL: #45406 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <midawson@redhat.com>
danielleadams
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 3, 2023
As documented in napi_wrap section, the returned reference must be deleted with `napi_delete_reference` in response to the finalize callback, in which `napi_unwrap` and `napi_remove_wrap` is not available. When the reference needs to be deleted early, it should be deleted after the wrapped value is not accessed with `napi_unwrap` and `napi_remove_wrap` too. This test is previously added in response to duplicating the test https://github.com/nodejs/node-addon-api/blob/main/test/objectwrap_constructor_exception.cc in the node-addon-api. As Napi::ObjectWrap<> is a subclass of Napi::Reference<>, napi_remove_wrap in the destructor of Napi::ObjectWrap<> is called before napi_delete_reference in the destructor of Napi::Reference<>. PR-URL: #45406 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <midawson@redhat.com>
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
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.
As documented in napi_wrap section, the returned reference must be
deleted with napi_delete_reference in response to the finalize
callback, in which napi_unwrap and napi_remove_wrap is not
available.
When the reference needs to be deleted early, it should be
deleted after the wrapped value is not accessed with napi_unwrap
and napi_remove_wrap too.
This test is previously added in response to duplicating the test
https://github.com/nodejs/node-addon-api/blob/main/test/objectwrap_constructor_exception.cc
in the node-addon-api. As Napi::ObjectWrap<> is a subclass of
Napi::Reference<>, napi_remove_wrap in the destructor of
Napi::ObjectWrap<> is called before napi_delete_reference in the
destructor of Napi::Reference<>.
This fix is intended to fix the use-after-free problem in #44141.