Defer this declaration " boost::shared_ptr<Frame> rx" in following way and see if that helps ... boost::shared_ptr<Frame> &rx = processing_queue.back( ) ;
This prevents the segfault, but I'm very curious about what was causing it. Any insight on the fundamental misuse?
Why not just assign? last_rx_frame = new Frame;
Last_rx_frame is a shared_ptr. That assignment is invalid. I have done it without a reset (creating and assigning a new shared_ptr and that has no effect.
last_rx_frame->bytes.reset( new u_char[size]) ; Is last_rx_frame->bytes also a shared_ptr? According to boost docs, a shared_ptr shouldn't be used to hold a dynamically allocated array; you should use shared_array instead. Just a shot in the dark.
last_rx_frame->bytes is a shared_array. Thanks for the help so far guys! I looked into it more and it seems if I comment out the memcpy in the get_ether_header function I do not get the segfault. ether_header Frame::get_ether_header( ) { ether_header ret ; memcpy( &ret, this->bytes.get(), this->size ) ; return ret ; } Its fine to return that stack var right there right? That should just copy the memory into the return value for the stack? -David