Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 28 May 2011 02:37:46 +0200
From: Luka Marčetić <>
Subject: Re: Weekly reports: A

On 05/24/2011 03:13 AM, Rich Felker wrote:
>> >  For "low and high byte content", I suggest that you include ability to
>> >  test all byte values (for non-wide chars).  glibc and many other libc's
>> >  include implementations of string functions that use adds/bitmasks;
>> >  these might contain bugs that only show up with specific byte values in
>> >  specific character positions when the libc is built for specific CPUs.
> I agree. I don't believe any such issues affect the current C
> implementations in musl, but it would be nice to have the tests in
> place in case anyone wants to add arch-specific asm versions.

Hey guys.
I would just like to point out that the above, combined with the "all 
alignments" requirement from the wiki means I'm essentially 
brute-forcing string.h functions. While I generally dislike the idea, 
it's a.. thorough approach.. I guess. As a slight remedy I'll "brute 
force" with smaller buffers, and only do basic tests with huge ones. I 
hope that won't miss the point then. Will report how mmaping more than a 
single GiB goes (1 is what I have).
Good night,

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.