[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 28 May 2011 02:37:46 +0200
From: Luka Marčetić <paxcoder@...il.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
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,
-Luka
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.
