Re: [PATCH 0/6] MR1111: winsock: Always use Unix SO_REUSEADDR on TCP sockets.

[Zebediah Figura (＠zfigura)]

Zebediah Figura (@zfigura) commented about server/sock.c:
> - struct bound_addr *bound_addr;
> -
> - if (!(bound_addr = malloc( sizeof(*bound_addr) )))
> -
>    fatal_error( "out of memory\n" );
> -
> - if (rb_put( &bound_addresses_tree, addr, &bound_addr->entry ))
> - {
> -
>    free( bound_addr );
> -
>    bound_addr = WINE_RB_ENTRY_VALUE(rb_get( &bound_addresses_tree, addr ), struct bound_addr, entry);
> -
>    if (bound_addr->reuse_count == -1)
> -
>    {
> -
>        if (debug_level)
> -
>            fprintf( stderr, "register_bound_address: address being updated is already exclusively bound\n" );
> -
>        return NULL;
> -
>    }
> -
>    ++bound_addr->reuse_count;

Under what circumstances can this happen? Should this be an assert() instead?

(I know that we don't want to bring down the server, but I think it's better to assert than go ahead with something that really shouldn't be the case. Alexandre might disagree with me, though.)