[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <811064381.9744980.1553613725891.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 11:22:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Frediano Ziglio <fziglio@...hat.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] avoid passing a parameter
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 09:36:48AM +0000, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> > Make code slightly smaller.
> > "file" should not be long and it should fit in NAME_MAX so
> > this code would be faster only rarely.
> > ---
> > src/process/execvp.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/src/process/execvp.c b/src/process/execvp.c
> > index ef3b9dd5..a2726af9 100644
> > --- a/src/process/execvp.c
> > +++ b/src/process/execvp.c
> > @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ int __execvpe(const char *file, char *const argv[], char
> > *const envp[])
> > return execve(file, argv, envp);
> >
> > if (!path) path = "/usr/local/bin:/bin:/usr/bin";
> > - k = strnlen(file, NAME_MAX+1);
> > + k = strlen(file);
> > if (k > NAME_MAX) {
> > errno = ENAMETOOLONG;
> > return -1;
> > --
> > 2.20.1
>
> Patch 1 looks ok, but patch 2 here is contrary to the direction I want
> to take things in musl. Using strnlen everywhere that excess length is
> an error is an idiom I'm trying to adopt all over. Here there's no
> serious practical impact either way (size difference is tiny, input
> string is not untrusted), but I still prefer use of the idiom.
>
> Rich
>
Fine for me to drop 2/2, I reached this code trying to workaround a
bug in binutils (I have a Fedora 29 with binutils 2.31 where each
static executable produced by musl were crashing).
Why not updating https://wiki.musl-libc.org/coding-style.html ?
Frediano
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.
