Check for CloseHandle failures even when not debugging

base/memory/shared_memory_win.cc

 // Copyright (c) 2011 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
 // Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
 // found in the LICENSE file.
 
 #include "base/memory/shared_memory.h"
 
 #include <aclapi.h>
 
 #include "base/logging.h"
 #include "base/memory/scoped_ptr.h"
@@ skipping 67 matching lines @@
 }
 
 // static
 SharedMemoryHandle SharedMemory::NULLHandle() {
   return NULL;
 }
 
 // static
 void SharedMemory::CloseHandle(const SharedMemoryHandle& handle) {
   DCHECK(handle != NULL);
-  ::CloseHandle(handle);
+  const BOOL result = ::CloseHandle(handle);
+  DCHECK(result);

[brucedawson, 2015/09/16 00:30:52]

This would have caught 524267.

[rvargas (doing something else), 2015/09/16 02:09:12]

Use CHECK

[brucedawson, 2015/09/16 18:29:00]

The reason I used DCHECK was because of the DCHECK above. If handle is NULL (or
INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE) then CloseHandle will fail and I wasn't sure I wanted that
causing customer crashes. Thoughts?

[rvargas (doing something else), 2015/09/16 18:54:38]

There's no semantic distinction between DCHECK and CHECK*, as in, if there's a
DCHECK somewhere it should mean that the condition should never happen so it
should be OK to replace it with a CHECK (with the only downside of increasing
the binary size). In other words, line 87 states that it is a bug to reach this
method with a uninitialized handle.

[*] I'm of course ignoring security implications.

 }
 
 // static
 size_t SharedMemory::GetHandleLimit() {
   // Rounded down from value reported here:
   // http://blogs.technet.com/b/markrussinovich/archive/2009/09/29/3283844.aspx
   return static_cast<size_t>(1 << 23);
 }
 
 // static
@@ skipping 164 matching lines @@
     CloseHandle(mapped_file_);
     mapped_file_ = NULL;
   }
 }
 
 SharedMemoryHandle SharedMemory::handle() const {
   return mapped_file_;
 }
 
 }  // namespace base